Depressed resilience of bluefin tuna in the western atlantic and age truncation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following intense overfishing in the 1970s, the western stock of Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) experienced a long period of depressed abundance, which has been attributed to failure of the population to periodically produce large numbers of juveniles, the western stock mixing with the more highly exploited eastern stock (fisheries in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea), and regime shift in the population's ecosystem resulting in lower replacement rates. To evaluate the presence of relatively strong years of juvenile production, we analyzed age structure from a recent sample of otoliths (ear stones) collected from the western stock (2011-2013, North Carolina, U.S.A., winter fishery). Mixing levels for the recent sample were analyzed using otolith stable isotopes to test whether age structure might be biased through immigration of eastern stock bluefin tuna. Age structure from historical samples collected from United States and Canadian fisheries (1975-1981) was compared with more recent samples (1996-2007) to examine whether demographic changes had occurred to the western stock that might have disrupted juvenile production. Relatively high juvenile production occurred in 2003, 2005, and 2006. Otolith stable isotope analysis showed that these recruitments were mostly of western stock origin. However, these high recruitments were >2-fold less than historical recruitment. We found substantial age truncation in the sampled fisheries. Half the historical sample was >20 years old (mean age = 20.1 [SD 3.7]; skewness = -0.3), whereas <5% of the recent sample was >20 years old (mean age = 13.4 [SD 3.8]; skewness = 1.3). Loss of age structure is consistent with changes in fishing selectivity and trends in the stock assessment used for management. We propose that fishing, as a forcing variable, brought about a threshold shift in the western stock toward lower biomass and production, a shift that emulates the regime shift hypothesis. An abbreviated reproductive life span compromised resilience by reducing the period over which adults spawn and thereby curtailing the stock's ability to sample year-to-year variability in conditions that favor offspring survival (i.e., storage effect). Because recruitment dynamics by the western stock exhibit threshold dynamics, returning it to a higher production state will entail greater reductions in exploitation rates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".