When performing studies that require fish age estimation, biologists must achieve a high level of accuracy and precision, as age, growth, and survival data are often used in models that inform management decisions. Otolith processing techniques vary, and no studies have assessed which methodology is more precise and cost effective. Our goal was to assess the precision, effort, and resources needed to perform the ground otolith and cut otolith methods in estimating ages of Blue Catfish Ictalurus furcatus, Channel Catfish I. punctatus, and Flathead Catfish Pylodictis olivaris. Readers exhibited high initial agreement rates for both aging methods with Blue Catfish (93.3–97.8%) and Flathead Catfish (88.9–96.3%). However, readers were more confident in their age estimates with the cut otolith method, and age–bias plots revealed significant bias between the techniques. The ground otolith method yielded lower age estimates compared to the cut otolith method by roughly 1 year for Flathead Catfish from age 6 through age 10 and yielded lower age estimates by about 1 year for Blue Catfish at ages 4 and 5. Conversely, for Channel Catfish, reader agreement and confidence were lower with the cut otolith method compared to the ground otolith method (66.7% and 95.7%), but no significant bias was detected between the processing techniques. The ground otolith method required lower startup costs and less effort than the cut otolith method for Blue Catfish and Channel Catfish, whereas the cut otolith method required less effort for Flathead Catfish. The cut otolith method required higher startup costs and was more expensive to perform than the ground otolith method. This study presents advantages and disadvantages of both methods, and we recommend that fishery professionals weigh the costs and benefits of each method when developing a program for applying a method to their study systems.

中文翻译：

---

两种估计三种Cat鱼年龄的耳石加工方法的比较

当进行需要估计鱼龄的研究时，生物学家必须达到很高的准确性和精密度，因为年龄，生长和生存数据通常用于告知管理决策的模型中。耳石处理技术各不相同，没有研究评估哪种方法更精确和更具成本效益。我们的目标是评估在估计蓝fish鱼Ictalurus furcatus，槽Channel鱼I. punctatus和扁平头Flat鱼Pylodictis olivaris的年龄时执行地面耳石法和切割耳石法所需的精度，工作量和资源。。读者对蓝Cat鱼（93.3–97.8％）和Flat鱼（88.9–96.3％）的两种老化方法均显示出较高的初始协议率。但是，读者对使用切割耳石法的年龄估计更有信心，并且年龄偏向图显示了这两种技术之间的显着偏差。对于6到10岁的head鱼，地面耳石法的年龄估计要比切耳石法的年龄低大约1年，而在4和5岁的蓝Cat鱼的地面耳石法的年龄估计要低大约1年。切割耳石方法比地面耳石方法的读者一致性和置信度要低（分别为66.7％和95.7％），但是在两种处理技术之间未发现明显的偏差。与蓝鱼和槽Channel鱼相比，地面耳石法需要的启动成本更低，工作量更少，而扁平头Cat鱼的耳石方法所需的工作量更少。切割耳石方法比地面耳石方法需要更高的启动成本并且执行起来更昂贵。这项研究提出了两种方法的优缺点，我们建议渔业专业人员在制定将一种方法应用于其研究系统的程序时，权衡每种方法的成本和收益。