In studies on artificial breeding of fishes lack of age-size uniformity of spawners connected with small number of specimens in sample are the basic logical problem in conclusions, because fish fecundity is related with size-age. Similarly in larval rearing small number of specimens in sample did not reflect stock size structure, what means ignoring of hierarchy, behavior and weaning differences.
Perhaps the scientists were asking different questions from those you're looking for answers for? Perhaps they were considering the 3R principles? Perhaps they didn't have the facilities or capacity to run larger studies? I guess you have to ask them ;-)
If they are collecting wild fish during spawning, low number is understandable. Especially if fish they are working with has little or any commercial value, getting fish is at the mercy of whoever is running the nets etc. I work with wild-caught fish (walleye) and getting sexually mature fish with any kind of uniformity is very difficult. Also, the number of fish I get is at the mercy of the DNR people who run nets.
Working with breeding fish is often really expensive with regards to broodstock maintenance and management. Consequently, the number of specimens that scientists can handle in their facilities and trials is often restricted by the fish size or their biological cycle (e.g. maturity age), among others. However, this does not diminishes the relevance of their findings, since scientists tend to design their experiments taking into consideration this facts (physiology and biology of the species).
It depend on the purpose that we are looking for. If the sources is limitted in the wild or even in the farm, less sample can be tolerated, therefore experiment design is very important to set up. Sometimes, i try to minimize the amount of sample because of budget limitation, nevertheless considering about sample representation and the validity of the result is also pivotal.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Philosophy Of Science
- Reasoning