BRUV systems with stereo-video cameras (stereo-BRUVs) enable precise measurements of body size (Harvey, Fletcher & Shortis 2001), which surpass estimates made by divers (Harvey et al. 2001). Both length and biomass distribution data are recognised as essential metrics for biodiversity conservation and fisheries management reporting (Langlois, Harvey & Meeuwig 2012b). Importantly, stereo-BRUVs provide comparable body-size distribution data to fisheries-dependent methods such as trawls (Cappo, Speare & De’ath 2004), hook and line (Langlois et al. 2012a), and trap fishing (Langlois et al. 2015). Despite being considered unsuitable for estimating density, stereo-BRUVs provide a cost-effective and statistically powerful method to detect spatio-temporal changes in the relative abundance, length, and biomass distribution of fish assemblages (Harvey et al. 2013; Malcolm et al. 2015; Bornt et al. 2015). However, in over 260 studies using stereo-BRUVS for a range of objectives (Supp. 1), Whitmarsh, Fairweather & Huveneers (2017) found widespread variation in methodology, which may prevent interoperability of the data.
