Basically, in a few words, you cannot compare a site that is in year one production, with little fish eating very little, so sulphide numbers are low, to second-year production where you have much bigger fish eating much more, and your sulphide number will be much higher, irrespective if you have IMTA or not.
I don't know exactly how she got the numbers, but whatever site it is, that's exactly what we have: we are comparing oranges of year one with apples or bananas of year two. And that's irrespective of having a few mussel rafts or seaweed rafts, so it's not a valid comparison. That doesn't work.