Brasil
Acta Amazonica
Sumário Anterior Atual Seguinte
Sumário
ANIMAL AND FISHERIES SCIENCES - ORIGINAL ARTICLE • Acta Amaz. 56 • 2026 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4392202404263 linkcopy

Open-access Effects of distance and co-sale with pirarucu on the prices of alternative commercial fish species in community-based management systems in the Brazilian Amazon

Efeitos da distância e da venda conjunta com pirarucu sobre os preços de espécies comerciais alternativas em sistemas de manejo comunitário na Amazônia Brasileira

AuthorshipSCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Participatory co-management of pirarucu has been widely studied in the Amazon; however, there is little information on commercial species other than pirarucu itself. Economic theory and empirical evidence suggest that logistical constraints and commercialization strategies can significantly shape price formation in small-scale fisheries, influencing both fisher income and market efficiency. This study evaluates the effects of the joint sale of pirarucu with other species, the distance from the fishing grounds to the urban centers and type of fisher on the sale price of the alternative commercial species. We analyzed 71 records of commercial fish production, aggregated by species, year, and fishing agreement area, involving six economically important species in the Middle Solimões River (Amazonas, Brazil), using linear mixed models with species as a random effect. The distance from the communities to the urban centers varied from 19 to 120 km, while prices varied from US$ 0.25 to 2.26/kg, being higher for Colossoma macropomum and lower for Piaractus brachypomus and Cichla sp. We found that distance tended to increase fish prices, although the effect was only marginally significant. This pattern may reflect an indirect effect, as more remote fishing areas are associated with larger individuals, which usually command higher prices. Type of fisher and joint sales with arapaima did not show robust effects on price. These findings suggest that distance plays a modest but relevant role in price formation, providing preliminary evidence that logistical factors, particularly distance to urban centers, influence multi-species value chains under participatory co-management in the Amazon.

KEYWORDS:
Arapaima gigas; Alternative fisheries; sustainability; fishery management; fish price

RESUMO

A co-gestão participativa do pirarucu tem sido amplamente estudada na Amazônia; entretanto, há pouca informação sobre espécies comerciais além do próprio pirarucu. A teoria econômica e as evidências empíricas indicam que restrições logísticas e estratégias de comercialização podem influenciar significativamente a formação de preços na pesca de pequena escala, afetando tanto a renda dos pescadores quanto a eficiência do mercado. Este estudo avaliou os efeitos da venda conjunta do pirarucu com outras espécies, da distância entre as áreas de pesca e os centros urbanos e do tipo de pescador sobre o preço de venda das espécies comerciais alternativas. Foram analisados 71 registros de produção pesqueira comercial, agregados por espécie, ano e área de acordo de pesca, envolvendo seis espécies de importância econômica no médio rio Solimões (Amazonas, Brasil), utilizando modelos lineares mistos com a espécie considerada como efeito aleatório. A distância entre as comunidades e os centros urbanos variou de 19 a 120 km, enquanto os preços oscilaram entre US$ 0,25 e US$ 2,26/kg, sendo mais elevados para Colossoma macropomum e mais baixos para Piaractus brachypomus e Cichla sp. Observou-se que a distância tende a aumentar os preços do pescado, embora o efeito tenha sido apenas marginalmente significativo. Esse padrão pode refletir um efeito indireto, uma vez que áreas de pesca mais remotas estão associadas à captura de indivíduos de maior porte, que geralmente alcançam preços mais altos. O tipo de pescador e as vendas conjuntas com o pirarucu não apresentaram efeitos consistentes sobre o preço. Esses resultados sugerem que a distância exerce um papel modesto, porém relevante, na formação de preços, fornecendo evidências preliminares de que fatores logísticos, especialmente a distância até os centros urbanos, influenciam as cadeias de valor multiespécies sob regimes de co-manejo participativo na Amazônia.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
Arapaima gigas; pesca alternativa; sustentabilidade; manejo pesqueiro; preço do pescado

INTRODUCTION

Overfishing is recognized as being one of the main causes of declines in fish populations (Pauly et al. 2002; Hilborn et al. 2003; Allan et al. 2005). In the Amazon the overfishing of pirarucu (Arapaima gigas (Schinz, 1822)), which almost led to the extinction of the species, is an iconic case (Bayley and Petrere 1989; Queiroz and Sardinha 1999). The recognition of this serious threat has led to the implementation of natural resource management measures, such as conservation areas, to reduce the pressure on fish stocks (Queiroz 2005; Garcez and Sánchez-Botero, 2006). In addition to this measure, other strategies were adopted, the best-known being participatory co-management of pirarucu. In this model, local communities engage in fishing within protected areas for which they are also responsible for enforcement and protection, which results in sustainable exploitation of fish stocks, especially pirarucu, thereby contributing to its conservation (Viana et al. 2004; Campos-Silva and Peres 2016).

Participatory co-management of pirarucu is considered an efficient conservation tool (Carvalho et al., 2025; Castello 2004; Gonçalves et al., 2024; Viana et al. 2004; 2007), as it considers the participation of community members and results in a mutual benefit between the environment and its users (Campos-Silva and Peres 2016; Campos-Silva et al. 2019). Since its implementation in 1999, pirarucu stocks have recovered and, in return, provide a source of income for local populations that adhere to the participatory co-management of pirarucu (Viana et al. 2004). In addition, this system also benefits other fish species, given the protection status assigned to the lakes (preservation, maintenance, and commercialization) (Viana et al. 2004; Medeiros-Leal et al. 2021).

Several studies in the Amazon have demonstrated positive effects of the restricted access to potential fishing sites on the fish assemblages (Morales et al. 2019; Silvano et al. 2009; Medeiros-Leal et al. 2021; Nagl et al. 2021). In the lower Solimões/Amazon River, participatory co-management of pirarucu was associated with a significant increase in the abundance and richness of stocks, especially of mandubé (Ageneiosus ucayalensis), sardinha (Triportheus albus), piaba (Tetragonopterus argenteus), piracatinga (Calophysus macropterus) and curimata (Curimata ocellata) (Medeiros-Leal 2021). At the same time, no differences in the abundance of the 14 species of fish of interest to fishers were found between lakes with free or restricted access in the Mamirauá reserve, middle Solimões river (Silvano etal. 2009). However, these authors found a greater abundance of an important commercial fish, the tambaqui (Colossoma macropomum (Cuvier, 1816)), which was greater in lakes with restricted access. These results indicate that, when compared to areas with open access, the efficiency of the conservation of protected areas and the participatory co-management system benefit not only the management focal-species, pirarucu, but the entire assemblage of fish that use this environment to complete their life cycle.

Thus, the high abundance of species other than the pirarucu, a target species for participatory co-management, opens up the possibility of exploitation and commercialization, especially of species of commercial interest, a practice that is called “alternative commercial fishing” (IDSM 2023). Alternative commercial fishing emerges as a source of extra income and ensures the maintenance of community management, since some of these species are among the most landed in the ports of the region, such as tambaqui and arowana (Osteoglossum bicirrhosum) (Cuvier, 1829) (Viana et al. 2004; Lopes and Freitas 2018).

Although there have been several studies regarding participatory community management focusing on pirarucu (Castello 2004; Viana et al. 2004; 2007; Campos-Silva and Peres 2016), little is reported about alternative commercial fishing and how much it contributes to these management systems. As such, studies on this theme are scarce, however essential, because their results can strengthen the success of participatory co-management, ensuring both the generation of income for the communities and the conservation of fish stocks in the region. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the alternative fishing of commercial species in the Mamirauá and Amanã sustainable development reserves, in the Central Brazilian Amazon, and test the hypothesis that the sale price of commercial alternative species is not influenced by the distance from the community to the nearest urban center, type of fisher, fishery production and their joint sale with the pirarucu. The explanatory variables were selected based on ecological, economic, and logistical considerations documented in the literature on Amazonian fisheries.

We expected a positive effect of the distance to urban center on the sales price, based on the assumption that more remote fishing areas are less exploited, more preserved, and tend to yield larger individuals, which are more valuable (Castello et al. 2015; Keppeler et al. 2018). We expected urban fishers to achieve higher prices, due to better access to markets, improved infrastructure, and stronger negotiation capacity (Jimenez et al., 2020). We anticipated a negative relationship between the fishery production and the sales prices, under the assumption that higher volumes of fish landed may lead to oversupply and a decrease in unit prices. A negative effect of the joint sales with pirarucu on the alternative species sale prices was expected, as bundling alternative species with pirarucu could reduce their individual market value, especially when high- and low-value species are sold together as a lot (Fernandes et al. 2007; Amaral 2007).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study area

The study was conducted in the Amanã and Mamirauá sustainable development reserves (SDRs), which are located in the municipality of Maraã, Amazonas. The Amanã SDR comprises an area of approximately 23,489.62 km2, and has 4,503 residents, distributed in 133 communities and approximately 182 users of the reserve who do not reside within the reserve (Sociedade Civil Mamirauá 2020). The Mamirauá SDR comprises an area of approximately 11,240 km2 with 1,668 residents and about 3,600 external users of the reserve (Sociedade Civil Mamirauá 2014). In these two protected areas, fishing agreements are established for the management of fishery resources.

Commercial Arrangements in the Study Areas

Fish commercialization in the Mamirauá and Amanã Sustainable Development Reserves takes place through different strategies, which vary depending on the type of fisher and the available infrastructure. In general, three main commercialization modalities are observed. Direct sales to local markets and consumers: Riverine fishers often sell their catch directly at community fairs or to small local vendors. These transactions are mostly informal and involve low logistical costs. Prices obtained in these sales are often higher than those offered by intermediaries; however, the volumes traded are usually very small, limiting the overall income generated. Sales to middlemen and intermediaries : Both riverine and urban fishers may sell their fish to middlemen, who collect the product directly in the communities or at designated delivery points. This practice is common in more remote areas, as it reduces transaction costs and risks for the fishers. However, dependency on a single buyer and low transparency in price formation usually lead to reduced compensation. Structured commercialization initiatives : Riverine and urban fishers involved in participatory co-management programs take part in more structured commercial arrangements. In these models, fishers and buyers meet in advance to negotiate the terms of the transaction, such as volumes, logistics schedules, and prices, often through pre-established contracts. This process increases transparency, improves predictability, and enables fishers to select the most economically advantageous arrangements. As a result, it strengthens their decision-making capacity. A notable example is the role of Associação dos Produtores Rurais de Carauari (ASPROC, Association of Rural Producers of Carauari), which currently leads the commercial arrangements of the Gosto da Amazônia (www.gostodaamazonia.com.br) initiative in the region. Through ASPROC, Gosto da Amazônia promotes the sustainable commercialization of fish with traceability, especially pirarucu, by establishing certified value chains, partnering with multiple community management groups, and expanding market reach to both national and international buyers.

Although not all transactions in the study areas occur through these structured circuits, such initiatives contribute to greater price stability, promote proper species separation, and encourage improved quality control practices, directly benefiting the participating fishers. The diversity of commercialization arrangements reflects the challenges faced by small-scale fishery value chains in the Amazon, particularly in terms of market access, logistical infrastructure, and institutional support. These aspects are relevant for interpreting price variability, although they were not directly included in the statistical models of this study.

Data collection

For this study, four areas with fishing agreements were selected, two in the Amanã SDR and two in the Mamirauá SDR (Figure 1). Fishers were categorized as riverine or urban. Riverine fishers are traditional residents of communities located inside or near the Mamirauá and Amanã Sustainable Development Reserves and participate in regulated commercial fishing under community-based management agreements. Urban fishers, in contrast, are residents of municipal centers such as Tefé and Maraã and are also involved in commercial fishing, through formal agreements. Both groups engage in commercial fisheries but differ in terms of market access, logistics, and infrastructure.

thumbnail of Figure 1
Figure 1
Location of the four areas with fishing agreements (FA) within the territorial limits of the Amanã and Mamirauá sustainable development reserves, on the middle Solimões River, Central Amazon. This figure is in color in the electronic version.

In the Amanã SDR, two fishing agreement (FA) areas were selected: Paraná Velho, which is composed of riverine fishers, and Pantaleão, composed of urban fishers. In the Mamirauá SDR, the selected areas were Caruara, composed of riverine fishers, and the Lago Preto-Itaúba-Tigre complex, composed of urban fishers (Figure 1). These distinctions reflect the fisher’s residence and logistical profile, not their legal status or fishing rights, as both groups are part of regulated management agreements.

The data used came from the database of the Fisheries Management Program of the Institute for Sustainable Development Mamirauá (IDSM). Information available in the annual technical reports for these four areas of fisheries agreements was used, which contained information on the capture and marketing of fish over seven years (2016- 2022). Fish selling prices were converted from Brazilian reais (R$) to US dollars (US$), using the annual average exchange rate in the reference years of the data from 2016 to 2022, ranging from US $ 3.1920 to US $ 5.3950 (Ipeadata 2024).

For each FA and year, we compiled records of six commercially important species (Supplementary Material, Table S1). Alternative fishing occurs depending on the fish assemblage. Thus, for the study, we selected species of commercial interest in the region and representatives of the main taxonomic orders of fish: Osteoglossiformes (arowana, Osteoglossum sp.), Characiformes (pirapitinga, Piaractus brachypomus (Cuvier, 1818) and tambaqui, Colossoma macropomum (Cuvier, 1816), Siluriformes (Surubim, Pseudoplatystoma sp.), Cichliformes (peacock bass Cichla sp.) and Acanthuriformes (pescada, Plagioscion sp.).

Data analysis

The unit of analysis was a species-area-year commercialization record. Each record included: (i) mean sale price (US$/kg), (ii) annual production of that species in the FA (kg), (iii) distance (km) from the community to the nearest urban center (Tefé or Maraã), and (iv) whether the sale occurred jointly with pirarucu (0 = no; 1 = yes). In total, we analyzed 71 records: arowana (n = 18), pirapitinga (n = 9), tambaqui (n = 15), surubim (n = 11), peacock bass (n = 11) and pescada (n = 7) (Supplementary Material, Table S1). Records are considered independent because they represent distinct species-area-year combinations, not repeated measures of individual transactions. Descriptive analysis was performed to estimate the range, mean and standard deviation of the variables (Zar 2010).

For inference, we fitted linear mixed-effects models (LMMs) with Gaussian error distribution (lme4 package; Bates et al. 2015), including species as a random intercept. The full model included four predictors defined a priori: the distance from the community to the nearest urban center (the municipalities of Tefé and Maraã, Amazonas); the type of fisher (0 = riverine, 1 = urban); total fishing production (in kg); whether the sale was conducted jointly with pirarucu (0 = no, 1 = yes). It is important to note that distance and type of fisher varied only at the level of fishing agreement (four areas), limiting the effective replication of these predictors.

Given the limited sample size (n = 71) relative to the number of predictors, we tested two models: one including production (AIC = 98.74) (Supplementary Material, Table S3) and one excluding production (AIC = 72.99). Since the model without production had the lower AIC, it was retained for inference (AIC; Burnham and Anderson, 2002). Results are reported as coefficients ± standard errors, with confidence intervals and p-values based on Satterthwaite’s approximation (lmerTest; Kuznetsova et al., 2017). Given the limited replication within species, we did not conduct species-level analyses and instead focused on identifying general patterns across the dataset.

Homoscedasticity and normality of residuals were checked by residual and Q-Q plots (Supplementary Material, Figure S1A and Figure S1B) (Zuur et al. 2009). Collinearity was assessed using the variance inflation factor (VIF < 5; Dormann et al., 2013) from the car package (Fox and Weisberg 2019) (Supplementary Material, Table S2). Model fit was evaluated using marginal and conditional R² (Nakagawa and Schielzeth, 2013), calculated with the MuMIn package (Bartoń, 2025). All analyses were carried out using R software, version 4.3.1 (R Core Team 2023).

RESULTS

The distances from the communities to the nearest urban center (municipalities of Tefé and Maraã, Amazonas) ranged from 19 to 120 km (Table 2). The fishery production of the species ranged from 3.60 to 71,009.00 kg, with the lowest being obtained for Plagioscion sp. and the greatest for Osteoglossum sp. (Table 2). The selling price of fish per kilogram (US$) ranged from 0.25 to 2.26, with the lowest value being paid per kg of Piaractus brachypomus and Cichla sp., and the highest value being paid per kg of Colossoma macropomum (Table 2).

Thumbnail
Table 1
Variables used in the study to evaluate alternative fisheries in the Amanã and Mamirauá sustainable development reserves, on the middle Solimões River, Central Amazon.

Thumbnail
Table 2
Summary of the descriptive statistics for the variables used to evaluate drivers of sale prices of alternative fish specie in the Amanã and Mamirauá sustainable development reserves, in the region of the middle Solimões River, Central Amazon. N = number of records, corresponding to species-area-year commercialization units.

In the linear mixed-effects models (n = 71), distance to the nearest urban center had a marginally positive effect on sale price (estimate = 0.0030 ± 0.0016, p = 0.058; Figure 2). Type of fisher (riverine vs. urban) and joint sales with pirarucu were not significant predictors (p > 0.05, Table 3, Figure 2a). The marginal R² (R²m = 0.061) indicated that fixed effects explained about 6% of the variance in prices, while the conditional R² (R²c = 0.587) showed that species (the random effect) accounted for approximately 58% of the variance. Thus, most of the variation in prices is attributable to differences among species. There was strong price variation across species (Figure 3), with higher values for Colossoma macropomum and lower values for Piaractus brachypomus and Cichla sp.

thumbnail of Figure 2
Figure 2
Fixed effects on fish price (US$ per kg) estimated by a linear mixed model (LMM), with 95% confidence intervals, in the Mamirauá and Amanã Sustainable Development Reserves (Central Amazon, Brazil). (A) Model predictors included distance (km) to the nearest urban center, type of fisher (urban vs. riverine), and whether the sale was conducted jointly with pirarucu. (B) Effect of distance (km) to the urban centers (Tefé and Maraã, Amazonas, Brazil) on the expected fish price (US$ per kg). Dots represent observed values, the green line indicates the model prediction, and the shaded area shows the 95% confidence interval.

Thumbnail
Table 3
Values obtained in the linear mixed model (LMM) for the value per kg (US$) of alternative fish species, evaluating the effects of distance, type of fisher (0 = riverine; 1 = urban) and joint sale (0 = no; 1 = yes). The marginal R² (R²m = 0.061) indicated that fixed effects explained little variation in fish prices, while the conditional R² (R²c = 0.587) highlighted that most variation was attributable to differences among species. Model AIC = 72.99836.

thumbnail of Figure 3
Figure 3
Variation in fish sale prices (US$ per kg) among the species analyzed in the Mamirauá and Amanã Sustainable Development Reserves (Central Amazon, Brazil). The boxplot shows that species is the main factor associated with price formation.

DISCUSSION

Price formation in small-scale fisheries is a multidimensional process shaped by ecological, logistical, and institutional factors. In our study, species were the main factor explaining price variation, in line with previous research that emphasizes the role of biological traits and consumer demand in determining fish value (Batista et al., 2012; Begossi et al., 2011). This strong species effect may have reduced the relative influence of other predictors, especially in multispecies records.

Distance (km) showed a marginally positive effect on fish price. Although not statistically robust, this tendency is consistent with studies conducted in the Amazon, which suggest that fishing areas located farther from urban centers tend to experience lower fishing pressure and more favorable environmental conditions, resulting in larger individuals (Petrere 1986; Castello et al. 2015; Tregidgo et al. 2017; Keppeler et al. 2018; Lubich et al. 2021). In this region, where fish are commonly sold by weight (Honda 1972; Gandra 2010; Silva et al. 2020), larger individuals typically receive higher prices. Although our results suggest that distance may act as a proxy for this effect, we were unable to test the direct role of fish size because such data were not available in the records analyzed. Future studies should incorporate size measurements to disentangle the relative effects of distance and body size on price formation. In addition, greater distances may also signal relative geographic isolation, potentially reducing buyer competition and contributing to higher prices. However, it is important to note that distance and type of fisher varied only across four fishing agreement areas. This low effective replication limits statistical power and means that inference for these predictors should be interpreted with caution.

Contrary to expectations from the literature, we did not identify statistically robust differences in prices between urban and riverine fishers (p > 0.05). The direction of the coefficient was consistent with the hypothesis of higher prices for urban fishers, which is often attributed to greater proximity to markets, better transportation, improved access to price information, and stronger bargaining power (Jimenez et al. 2020; Amaral 2007). However, the estimate was imprecise in the multispecies arrangement. Several mechanisms may explain this result. First, price formation in the study area appears to be strongly influenced by species (included as a random effect), which may attenuate group-level differences when records pool multiple species. Second, unobserved factors such as market saturation, availability of cold-chain infrastructure, and local competition among buyers, documented in previous studies (Amaral 2007; Jimenez et al. 2019), were not directly measured and may have masked contrasts between groups. Third, statistical power is limited by the total number of records and the low replication within species, restricting species-specific inference. Future research should (i) increase replication within species, (ii) collect direct measures of access to information, refrigeration infrastructure, and buyer competition along the value chain (Jimenez et al. 2020), and (iii) apply hierarchical models at the species level to disentangle group effects from interspecific heterogeneity.

Joint sales with Arapaima gigas did not show a significant association with prices in the general model (p > 0.50). This result adds to the mixed evidence reported in the literature: in southern Brazil, multispecies lots were associated with lower fisher income and greater buyer control (Fernandes et al., 2004), whereas in Moorea, French Polynesia, multispecies sales increased aggregate prices (Nassiri et al., 2021). In our case, several factors may have attenuated the expected effect. First, the binary indicator of co-sale likely obscures variation in lot composition, as it does not capture the relative contribution of each species. Second, even within co-sale transactions, substantial heterogeneity in the proportion of pirarucu and alternative species can lead to divergent pricing outcomes. These two layers of variability reduce the ability to detect a consistent effect of bundling. Third, the high perishability of fresh fish and the lack of adequate cold-storage infrastructure in remote communities (Amaral 2007; Jimenez et al., 2019) may reduce price differentials between joint and separate sales. To strengthen inference, future studies should (i) quantify the relative contribution of each species within mixed lots, (ii) distinguish prices negotiated at the point of acquisition from those at final resale (Reid 2004; Santos and Santos, 2005), and (iii) exploit exogenous variation in commercialization structures, such as the introduction of cold-storage facilities or logistical bases, to identify causal effects.

The study has broader implications for understanding how equity and sustainability are shaped in participatory co-management systems. As emphasized by Campos-Silva et al. (2018), pricing mechanisms directly influence income distribution in Amazonian fisheries. Although distance was positively associated with prices, this effect may operate indirectly, with remoteness serving as a proxy for larger fish sizes, a variable not directly available in our dataset. Thus, our policy considerations should be interpreted as exploratory, highlighting the need for future studies that explicitly test body size effects before deriving firm market recommendations. In this context, market differentiation instruments such as certification, traceability schemes, or geographical indications may reinforce these pricing mechanisms by enabling products from remote areas to achieve greater recognition and value (Gonçalves et al. 2025; Farias 2025; Souza et al. 2024). Future research should examine how these initiatives interact with the drivers identified here to promote both economic resilience and sustainable fisheries management.

Finally, these findings can inform the development of public policies that integrate commercialization strategies, equitable value distribution, and improved market access for fishers. Promoting sustainable fisheries in the Amazon demands more than ecological management; it requires inclusive governance, transparency in the value chain, and alignment with global frameworks such as the FAO Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries (FAO, 2015, 2017) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2024). The results should be interpreted with caution, but they offer practical insights for policies and initiatives that aim to align community-based management with the strengthening of fair and resilient fishery value chains in the Amazon.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide preliminary evidence that logistical factors, particularly distance to urban centers, shape price formation in multi-species value chains under participatory co-management. Despite residual uncertainty and low within-species replication, these results offer a practical basis for aligning community-based management with strategies for value addition and market differentiation of Amazonian fish products.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the Instituto Mamirauá and the Fisheries Management Program, especially the members Reinaldo Marinho, Jonas Batista, Carlos Alberto, Ruiter Braga, Iranir Carlos, Ney Bezerra and Yvina Batalha, for their valuable work in the management areas of Mamirauá and Amanã. Special thanks go to Jovane Marinho, whose willingness to clarify doubts related to alternative commercial fishing was crucial for the development of this work. The commitment, dedication and teachings of each one were fundamental to the realization of this article.

REFERENCES

  • Allan, J.D.; Abell, R.; Hogan, Z.E.B.; Revenga, C.; Taylor, B.W.; Welcomme, R.L.; et al 2005. Overfishing of inland waters.BioScience, 55: 1041-1051.
  • Amaral, E.S.R. 2007. A comunidade e o mercado: Os desafios na comercialização de pirarucu manejado das reservas Mamirauá e Amanã, Amazonas-Brasil. Scientific Magazine UAKARI, 3: 7-17.
  • Bartoń, K. 2025. MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference. R package version 1.48.11, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn
    » https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn
  • Bates, D.; Mächler, M.; Bolker, B.; Walker, S. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of statistical software, 67: 1-48.
  • Batista, V.S.; Inhamuns, A.J.; Freitas, C.E.C.; Freire-Brasil, D. 2012. Characterization of the fishery in river communities in the low-Solimões/High-Amazon region. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 9(2): 101-111.
  • Bayley, P.B.; Petrere, M.Jr. 1989. Amazon fisheries: assessment methods, current status and management options. Canadian Special Publications on Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 106: 385-398.
  • Begossi, A.; Salivonchyk, S.V.; Hallwass, G.; Hanazaki, N.; Lopes, P.F.; Silvano, R.A. 2011. Ethnobiology of snappers (Lutjanidae): target species and suggestions for management. Fisheries Research, 110(2): 356-362.
  • Burnham, K. P.; Anderson, D. R. (Eds.). 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. New York, NY: Springer New York, 488p.
  • Campos-Silva, J.V.; Peres, C.A. 2016. Community-based management induces rapid recovery of a high-value tropical freshwater fishery. Scientific Reports, 6(1): 34745.
  • Campos-Silva, J.V.; Hawes, J.E.; Andrade, P.C.; Peres, C.A. 2018. Unintended multispecies co-benefits of an Amazonian community-based conservation programme. Nature Sustainability, 1(11): 650-656.
  • Campos-Silva, J.V.; Hawes, J.E.; Peres, C.A. 2019. Population recovery, seasonal site fidelity, and daily activity of pirarucu (Arapaima spp.) in an Amazonian floodplain mosaic. Freshwater Biology, 64: 1255-1264.
  • Carvalho, G.C.L.; Zuanon, J.; Morales, B.F.; Barros, G.G.; Borba, G.C.; Amadio, S.A.; et al 2025. Fisheries co-management strengthen the effectiveness of protected areas in Amazonian floodplain lakes. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 32: e12768.
  • Castello, L. 2004. A method to count pirarucu Arapaima gigas: fishers, assessment, and management.North American Journal of Fisheries Management,24: 379-389.
  • Castello, L.; Arantes, C.C.; Mcgrath, D.G.; Stewart, D.J.; Sousa, F.S.D. 2015. Understanding fishing-induced extinctions in the Amazon. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 25: 587-598.
  • Dormann, C.F.; Elith, J.; Bacher, S.; Buchmann, C.; Carl, G.; Carré, G.; et al 2013. Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography, 36: 27-46.
  • Farias, D.F.A. 2025. A indicação geográfica e a proteção de produtos da sociobioeconomia de povos e comunidades tradicionais. Contribuciones a Las Ciencias Sociales, 18: 01-26.
  • FAO. 2015. Voluntary guidelines for securing sustainable small-scale fisheries in the context of food security and poverty eradication. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/edfffbfc-81e5-4208-a36f-334ff81ac10f/content
    » https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/edfffbfc-81e5-4208-a36f-334ff81ac10f/content
  • FAO. 2017. Diretrizes voluntárias para garantir a pesca de pequena escala sustentável no contexto da segurança alimentar e da erradicação da pobreza. Organização das Nações Unidas para a Alimentação e a Agricultura. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/da75610f-fea4-4c66-bbeb-67c0dce76195/content
    » https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/da75610f-fea4-4c66-bbeb-67c0dce76195/content
  • Fernandes, L.A.; Vieira, J.; Basaglia, T.; Burns, M.; Bemvenuti, M.; Garcia, A. 2007. Pesca artesanal na Lagoa Mirim, RS: Conflitos de interesses e ameaças à sustentabilidade do ecossistema costeiro.VII Encontro da Sociedade Brasileira de Economia Ecológica Fortaleza, p. 28-30.
  • Fox, J.; Weisberg, S. 2019. Nonlinear regression, nonlinear least squares, and nonlinear mixed models in R. population, 150, 200. (https://www.john-fox.ca/Companion/appendices/Appendix-Nonlinear-Regression.pdf)
    » https://www.john-fox.ca/Companion/appendices/Appendix-Nonlinear-Regression.pdf
  • Gandra, A.L. 2010. O mercado de pescado da região metropolitana de Manaus.Montevidéu: Infopesca, 91p. (https://www.infopesca.org/sites/default/files/complemento/publilibreacceso/282/Manaus-completo.pdf)
    » https://www.infopesca.org/sites/default/files/complemento/publilibreacceso/282/Manaus-completo.pdf
  • Garcez, D.S.; Sánchez-Botero, J.I. 2006. La pesca practicada por niños ribereños de Manacapuru, Amazonía Central, Brasil. Boletim do Instituto de Pesca, 32: 79-85.
  • Gonçalves, A.C.T.; Santos, L.C.R.D. 2024. Bioeconomy in Central Amazon: Participatory Management of Pirarucu (Arapaima gigas). Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 28: e240195.
  • Hilborn, R.; Branch, T.A.; Ernst, B.; Magnusson, A.; Minte-Vera, C.V.; Scheuerell, M. D.; et al 2003. State of the world’s fisheries. Annual review of Environment and Resources, 28: 59-399.
  • Honda, E.M.S. 1972. Peixes encontrados nos mercados de Manaus.Acta Amazonica, 2: 97-98.
  • IDSM. 2025. Instituto Mamirauá. Projeto no Território da Indicação Geográfica Mamirauá busca agregar mais valor ao pirarucu de manejo. Tefé, AM, Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá. ( (https://mamiraua.org.br/noticias/pirarucu-mamiraua ). Accessed on 02 Sep 2025.
    » https://mamiraua.org.br/noticias/pirarucu-mamiraua
  • IDSM. 2023. Instituto Mamirauá. Relatório Técnico anual de 2023 dos projetos de manejo dos recursos pesqueiros nas Reservas de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá, Amanã e entorno. Tefé, AM, Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá
  • IPEDATA. 2024. Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada: Dados macroeconômicos e regionais. ((http://www.ipeadata.gov.br ). Accessed on 05 Aug 2024.
    » http://www.ipeadata.gov.br
  • Jimenez, É.A.; Barboza, R.S.L.; Amaral, M.T.; Frédou, F.L. 2019. Understanding changes to fish stock abundance and associated conflicts: Perceptions of small-scale fishers from the Amazon coast of Brazil. Ocean & Coastal Management, 182: 104954.
  • Jimenez, E.A.; Amaral, M.T.; de Souza, P.L.; Costa, M.D.N.F.; Lira, A.S.; Fredou, F.L. 2020. Value chain dynamics and the socioeconomic drivers of small-scale fisheries on the amazon coast: A case study in the state of Amapá, Brazil. Marine Policy, 115: 103856.
  • Keppeler, F.W.; de Souza, A.C.; Hallwass, G.; Begossi, A.; de Almeida, M.C.; Isaac, V.J.; et al 2018. Ecological influences of human population size and distance to urban centres on fish communities in tropical lakes. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 28: 1030-1043.
  • Kuznetsova, A.; Brockhoff, P. B.; Christensen, R. H. B. 2017. lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82: 1-26.
  • Lopes, G.C.S.; Freitas, C.E.C. 2018. Avaliação da pesca comercial desembarcada em duas cidades localizadas no rio Solimões-Amazonas. Biota Amazônia, 8: 36-41.
  • Lubich, C.; Campos, C.; Freitas, C.; Siqueira-Souza, F. 2021. Effects of fishing on the population of Speckled Pavon Cichla temensis in the Middle Negro River (Amazonas State, Brazil): a decrease in the size of the trophy fish?. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 150: 667-678.
  • Medeiros-Leal, W.M.; Castello, L.; Freitas, C.E.; Siqueira-Souza, F.K. 2021. Single-species co-management improves fish assemblage structure and composition in a Tropical River. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 9: 604170.
  • Morales, B.F.; Ota, R.P.; Silva, V.D.P.E.; Deus, C.P.D. 2019. Ichthyofauna from floodplain lakes of Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Piagaçu-Purus (RDS-PP), lower rio Purus. Biota Neotropica, 19: e20190779.
  • Nagl, P.; Hallwass, G.; Tomazoni-Silva, L.H.; Nitschke, P.P.; Rowedder, A.R.; Romero-Martinez, A.T.; et al 2021. Protected areas and frugivorous fish in tropical rivers: Small-scale fisheries, conservation and ecosystem services.Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 31: 2752-2771.
  • Nakagawa, S.; Schielzeth, H. 2013. A general and simple method for obtaining R² from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4: 133-142.
  • Nassiri, A.; Thébaud, O.; Holbrook, S.J.; Lauer, M.; Rassweiler, A.; Schmitt, R.J.; et al 2021. Hedonic evaluation of coral reef fish prices on a direct sale market.Marine Policy, 129: 104525.
  • Pauly, D.; Christensen, V.; Guénette, S.; Pitcher, T.J.; Sumaila, U.R.; Walters, C.J.; et al 2002. Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 418: 689-695.
  • Petrere Jr, M. 1986. Amazon fisheries I-Variations in the relative abundance of Tambaqui (Colossoma macropomum CUVIER, 1818) based on catch and effort data of the gill-net fisheries. Amazoniana, 9: 527-547.
  • Queiroz, H.L. 2005. A reserva de desenvolvimento sustentável Mamirauá.Estudos avançados, 19: 183-203.
  • Queiroz, H.; Sardinha, A.D. 1999. A preservação e o uso sustentado dos pirarucus (Arapaima gigas, Osteoglossidae) em Mamirauá. In: Queiroz, H.L.; Crampton, W.G.R. (Eds.). Estratégias para manejo dos recursos pesqueiros em Mamirauá Brasilia: SCM, CNPq/ MCT, p. 108-141.
  • R Core Team. 2023. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org
    » https://www.R-project.org
  • Reid, C. 2004. Intermediation, Opportunism and the State Loans Debate in Scotland’s Herring Fisheries before World War I. International Journal of Maritime History, 16: 1-26.
  • Santos, G.M.D.; Santos, A.C.M.D. 2005. Sustentabilidade da pesca na Amazônia.Estudos avançados, 19: 165-182.
  • Silva, R.D.S.; França, S.M.D.A.F.; De Lima Yamaguchi, K.K. 2020. Identificação das espécies de peixes mais comercializadas em um município no interior do Amazonas.Brazilian Journal of Development, 6: 20483-20498.
  • Silvano, R.A., Ramires, M.; Zuanon, J. 2009. Effects of fisheries management on fish communities in the floodplain lakes of a Brazilian Amazonian Reserve. Ecology of freshwater fish, 18: 156-166.
  • Sociedade Civil Mamirauá. 2014. Plano de Gestão: Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá - RDSM. - 3.ed.rev. e ampl. - Tefé, AM: IDS, 114p. (https://mamiraua.org.br/documentos/a530527d7fd74ca478cb3ad891881be0.pdf)
    » https://mamiraua.org.br/documentos/a530527d7fd74ca478cb3ad891881be0.pdf
  • Sociedade Civil Mamirauá 2020. Plano de gestão da Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Amanã: versão resumida e ilustrada. Nascimento, A.C.S. (Org. geral). Manaus: Sociedade Civil Mamiruá. 102p.
  • Souza, J.P.; Rossoni, F.; Kurihara, L.; Gonçalves, A.C.T.; Dias, A.A.; Alvarenga, F.; et al 2024. A certificação orgânica como estratégia de fortalecimento da cadeia do pirarucu de manejo sustentável no Amazonas. Cadernos de Agroecologia, 19: 1-6.
  • Tregidgo, D.J.; Barlow, J.; Pompeu, P.S.; De Almeida Rocha, M.; Parry, L. 2017. Rainforest metropolis casts 1,000-km defaunation shadow. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114: 8655-8659.
  • United Nations. 2024. Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável no Brasil. https://brasil.un.org/pt-br/sdgs
    » https://brasil.un.org/pt-br/sdgs
  • Viana, J. P.; Damasceno, J.M.B.; Castello, L.; Crampton, W.G. 2004. Economic incentives for sustainable community management of fishery resources in the Mamiraua Sustainable Development Reserve, Amazonas, Brazil. In: Silvius, K.M.; Bodmer, R.E.; Fragoso, J.M.V. (Eds.).People in nature: wildlife conservation in South and Central America Columbia University Press. p. 139-154.
  • Viana, J.P.; Castello, L.; Damasceno, J.M.B.; Amaral, E.S.R.; Estupiñán, G.M.B.; Arantes, C.; et al 2007. Community organized management of pirarucu Arapaima gigas in the Mamiraua Sustainable Development Reserve, Amazonas, Brazil. In: Prates, A.P.; Blanc, D. (Eds.).Áreas aquáticas protegidas como instrumento de gestão pesqueira, Brasília: MMA/SBF, 272p.
  • Zar, J.H. 2010. Biostatistical analysis 5. ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 960p.
  • Zuur, A.F.; Ieno, E.N.; Walker, N.J.; Saveliev, A.A.; Smith, G.M. 2009. Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R New York: Springer, 574p.
  • CITE AS:
    Olentino, D.; Lubich, C.; Meireles, B.; Gonçalves, A.C.T.; Yamamoto, K. 2026. Effects of distance and co-sale with pirarucu on the prices of alternative commercial fish species in community-based management systems in the Brazilian Amazon. Acta Amazonica 56: e56af24426.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available, upon reasonable request, from Instituto Mamirauá: Fisheries Management Program.

Edited by

Publication Dates

  • Publication in this collection
    19 Jan 2026
  • Date of issue
    2026

History

  • Received
    26 Dec 2024
  • Accepted
    17 Sept 2025
Creative Common - by 4.0
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
location_on
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia Av. André Araujo, 2936 Aleixo, 69060-001 Manaus AM Brasil, Tel.: +55 92 3643-3030, Fax: +55 92 643-3223 - Manaus - AM - Brazil
E-mail: acta@inpa.gov.br
rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS
Reportar erro