Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A trap funnel has to do two opposed things: admit the fish that are wanted and then refuse to let them back out. This study originates a sizing rule for the funnel entrance cone by modelling both duties from stated assumptions. Entry is modelled as a rising function of the ratio between throat diameter and the body depth of the target fish; escape over a 24-hour soak is modelled from the throat area a searching fish is presented with, the cone half-angle that guides it back to the throat, and the cone length it must traverse. A design is accepted when modelled entry probability is at least 0.80 and modelled escapement over 24 hours is at most 0.10. A throat equal to the body depth admits only half the target fish (entry probability 0.50), so the throat must exceed the depth: the recommended window runs from 1.18 to 1.40 times the body depth for every target size computed. The cone angle ceiling tightens sharply as the target fish grows: at the stated standard, a 60 mm fish tolerates angles up to 40 degrees, a 100 mm fish up to 27 degrees at its narrowest recommended throat, and a 150 mm fish only 12 degrees. Computed windows are tabulated for target body depths of 60, 80, 100, 120 and 150 mm. This study is simulated, not measured.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
William Alexander Aldred (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: