Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparative study of spatial interpolation methods for determining fishery resources density in the Yellow Sea

  • Published:
Acta Oceanologica Sinica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Spatial interpolation is a common tool used in the study of fishery ecology, especially for the construction of ecosystem models. To develop an appropriate interpolation method of determining fishery resources density in the Yellow Sea, we tested four frequently used methods, including inverse distance weighted interpolation (IDW), global polynomial interpolation (GPI), local polynomial interpolation (LPI) and ordinary kriging (OK). A cross-validation diagnostic was used to analyze the efficacy of interpolation, and a visual examination was conducted to evaluate the spatial performance of the different methods. The results showed that the original data were not normally distributed. A log transformation was then used to make the data fit a normal distribution. During four survey periods, an exponential model was shown to be the best semivariogram model in August and October 2014, while data from January and May 2015 exhibited the pure nugget effect. Using a paired-samples t test, no significant differences (P>0.05) between predicted and observed data were found in all four of the interpolation methods during the four survey periods. Results of the cross-validation diagnostic demonstrated that OK performed the best in August 2014, while IDW performed better during the other three survey periods. The GPI and LPI methods had relatively poor interpolation results compared to IDW and OK. With respect to the spatial distribution, OK was balanced and was not as disconnected as IDW nor as overly smooth as GPI and LPI, although OK still produced a few “bull’s-eye” patterns in some areas. However, the degree of autocorrelation sometimes limits the application of OK. Thus, OK is highly recommended if data are spatially autocorrelated. With respect to feasibility and accuracy, we recommend IDW to be used as a routine interpolation method. IDW is more accurate than GPI and LPI and has a combination of desirable properties, such as easy accessibility and rapid processing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alam R Q, Benson B C, Visser J M, et al. 2016. Response of estuarine phytoplankton to nutrient and spatio-temporal pattern of physico-chemical water quality parameters in Little Vermilion Bay, Louisiana. Ecological Informatics, 32: 79–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appice A, Malerba D. 2014. Leveraging the power of local spatial autocorrelation in geophysical interpolative clustering. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 28(5–6): 1266–1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cambardella C A, Moorman T B, Parkin T B, et al. 1994. Field-scale variability of soil properties in central Iowa soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 58(5): 1501–1511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campos J A D B, Melanda E A, Antunes J D S, et al. 2011. Dental caries and the nutritional status of preschool children—a spatial analysis. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 16(10): 4161–4168

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Tao, Liu Xingmei, Li Xia, et al. 2009. Heavy metal sources identification and sampling uncertainty analysis in a field-scale vegetable soil of Hangzhou, China. Environmental Pollution, 157(3): 1003–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung W W L, Pitcher T J. 2008. Evaluating the status of exploited taxa in the northern South China Sea using intrinsic vulnerability and spatially explicit catch-per-unit-effort data. Fisheries Research, 92(1): 28–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO. 2010. The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2010. Rome: FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, 197

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Longatt F, Medina H, González J S. 2015. Spatial interpolation and orographic correction to estimate wind energy resource in Venezuela. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 48: 1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gumiere S J, Lafond J A, Hallema D W, et al. 2014. Mapping soil hydraulic conductivity and matric potential for water management of cranberry: characterisation and spatial interpolation methods. Biosystems Engineering, 128: 29–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gyasi-Agyei Y, Pegram G. 2014. Interpolation of daily rainfall networks using simulated radar fields for realistic hydrological modelling of spatial rain field ensembles. Journal of Hydrology, 519: 777–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jerosch K. 2013. Geostatistical mapping and spatial variability of surficial sediment types on the Beaufort Shelf based on grain size data. Journal of Marine Systems, 127: 5–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin Xianshi, Tang Qisheng. 1996. Changes in fish species diversity and dominant species composition in the Yellow Sea. Fisheries Research, 26(3–4): 337–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin Xianshi, Xu Binduo, Tang Qisheng. 2003. Fish assemblage structure in the East China Sea and southern Yellow Sea during autumn and spring. Journal of Fish Biology, 62(5): 1194–1205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin Xianshi, Zhao Xianyong, Meng Tianxiang, et al. 2005. Living Resources and Environment in the Yellow Sea and Bohai Sea (in Chinese). Beijing: Science Press, 149–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Jin, Heap A D. 2014. Spatial interpolation methods applied in the environmental sciences: a review. Environmental Modelling & Software, 53: 173–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Jin, Heap A D, Potter A, et al. 2011a. Can we improve the spatial predictions of seabed sediments? A case study of spatial interpolation of mud content across the southwest Australian margin. Continental Shelf Research, 31(13): 1365–1376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Zhonglu, Shan Xiujuan, Jin Xianshi, et al. 2011b. Long-term variations in body length and age at maturity of the small yellow croaker (Larimichthys polyactis Bleeker, 1877) in the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea, China. Fisheries Research, 110(1): 67–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin Lin, Li Chunhou, Dai Ming, et al. 2007. Optimization of the spatial interpolation for marine phytoplankton abundance. Acta Ecologica Sinica (in Chinese), 27(7): 2880–2888

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin Zhonghui, Mo Xingguo, Li Hongxuan, et al. 2002. Comparison of three spatial interpolation methods for climate variables in China. Acta Geographica Sinica (in Chinese), 57(1): 47–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Ruimin, Chen Yaxin, Sun Chengchun, et al. 2014a. Uncertainty analysis of total phosphorus spatial-temporal variations in the Yangtze River Estuary using different interpolation methods. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 86(1–2): 68–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Zhanjun, Zhou Wei, Shen Jianbo, et al. 2014b. A simple assessment on spatial variability of rice yield and selected soil chemical properties of paddy fields in South China. Geoderma, 235–236: 39–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller R L. 1956. Trend surfaces: their application to analysis and description of environments of sedimentation. The Journal of Geology, 64(5): 425–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller T G, Pusuluri N B, Mathias K K, et al. 2004. Map quality for ordinary kriging and inverse distance weighted interpolation. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 68(6): 2042–2047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Lapeña B, Wijnberg K M, Stein A, et al. 2013. Spatial variogram estimation from temporally aggregated seabird count data. Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 20(3): 353–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanabria L A, Qin X, Li J, et al. 2013. Spatial interpolation of McArthur’s forest fire danger index across Australia: observational study. Environmental Modelling & Software, 50: 37–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardi M, Chessa L A, Fresi E, et al. 2006. Optimizing interpolation of shoot density data from a Posidonia oceanica seagrass bed. Marine Ecology, 27(4): 339–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scudiero E, Corwin D L, Morari F, et al. 2016. Spatial interpolation quality assessment for soil sensor transect datasets. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 123: 74–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Şen Z, Şahİn A D. 2001. Spatial interpolation and estimation of solar irradiation by cumulative semivariograms. Solar Energy, 71(1): 11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shan Xiujuan, Chen Yunlong, Dai Fangqun, et al. 2014. Variations in fish community structure and diversity in the sections of the central and southern Yellow Sea. Acta Ecologica Sinica (in Chinese), 34(2): 377–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber D, Englund E. 1992. Evaluation and comparison of spatial interpolators. Mathematical Geology, 24(4): 381–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei Hao, Shi Jie, Lu Youyu, et al. 2010. Interannual and long-term hydrographic changes in the Yellow Sea during 1977–1998. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 57(11–12): 1025–1034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Tingting, Li Yingru. 2013. Spatial interpolation of temperature in the United States using residual kriging. Applied Geography, 44: 112–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie Yunfeng, Chen Tongbin, Lei Mei, et al. 2011. Spatial distribution of soil heavy metal pollution estimated by different interpolation methods: accuracy and uncertainty analysis. Chemosphere, 82(3): 468–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu Binduo, Jin Xianshi. 2005. Variations in fish community structure during winter in the southern Yellow Sea over the period 1985–2002. Fisheries Research, 71(1): 79–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao Liqiang, Huo Zailin, Feng Shaoyuan, et al. 2014. Evaluation of spatial interpolation methods for groundwater level in an arid inland oasis, northwest China. Environmental Earth Sciences, 71(4): 1911–1924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ye Yimin, Cochrane K, Bianchi G, et al. 2013. Rebuilding global fisheries: the world summit goal, costs and benefits. Fish and Fisheries, 14(2): 174–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu Hao, Jiao Yan, Carstensen L W. 2013. Performance comparison between spatial interpolation and GLM/GAM in estimating relative abundance indices through a simulation study. Fisheries Research, 147: 186–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Xiaolin, Liu Desheng, Chen Jin. 2012. A new geostatistical approach for filling gaps in landsat ETM+ SLC-off images. Remote Sensing of Environment, 124: 49–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman D, Pavlik C, Ruggles A, et al. 1999. An experimental comparison of ordinary and universal kriging and inverse distance weighting. Mathematical Geology, 31(4): 375–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge crews of R/V Beidou for their efforts of field sampling. The authors are also grateful for our colleagues who providing useful suggestions to this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qingdao, 266071, China

    Yunlong Chen

  2. Function Laboratory for Marine Fisheries Science and Food Production Processes, Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Qingdao, 266100, China

    Xiujuan Shan & Xianshi Jin

  3. Key Laboratory of Sustainable Development of Marine Fisheries of Ministry of Agriculture, Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences, Qingdao, 266071, China

    Yunlong Chen, Xiujuan Shan, Xianshi Jin, Tao Yang & Fangqun Dai

  4. Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Fishery Resources and Ecological Environment, Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences, Qingdao, 266071, China

    Yunlong Chen, Xiujuan Shan, Xianshi Jin, Tao Yang & Fangqun Dai

  5. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

    Yunlong Chen

  6. State Key Laboratory of Oceanography in the Tropics, South China Sea Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, 510301, China

    Dingtian Yang

Authors
  1. Yunlong Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiujuan Shan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xianshi Jin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tao Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fangqun Dai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dingtian Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiujuan Shan.

Additional information

Foundation item: The National Basic Research Program of China under contract No. 2015CB453303; the National Natural Science Foundation of China under contract No. U1405234; the Aoshan Science & Technology Innovation Program under contract No. 2015ASKJ02-05; the Special Fund of the Taishan Scholar Project.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, Y., Shan, X., Jin, X. et al. A comparative study of spatial interpolation methods for determining fishery resources density in the Yellow Sea. Acta Oceanol. Sin. 35, 65–72 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13131-016-0966-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13131-016-0966-y

Key words

Search

Navigation