MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1963573094 · doi:10.1139/f06-038

Aggregated yield and fishing effort in multispecies fisheries: an empirical analysis

2006· article· en· W1963573094 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kai Lorenzen, Oriana Trindade de Almeida, Robert Arthur, C. Garaway, Sophie Nguyen Khoa

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment for International DevelopmentGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsAkaike information criterionFishingCatch per unit effortFisheries managementFisheryBioeconomicsRange (aeronautics)Yield (engineering)EconometricsEcologyEnvironmental scienceStatisticsEconomicsMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many tropical fisheries are inherently of a multispecies nature, with any given type of fishing gear harvesting a wide range of species. Species-aggregated relationships between fishing effort and yield or catch per unit of effort (CPUE) provide important information for the management of such fisheries, as well as insights into ecosystem-level responses to fisheries exploitation. We used a model selection approach to study species-aggregated, yield–effort relationships in spatially replicated, multispecies inland fisheries. Of three alternative models considered, the data strongly supported a sigmoid functional form (Akaike weight 0.95) over the alternative, asymptotic exponential or quadratic (Schaefer) models (Akaike weights 0.03 and 0.02, respectively). The sigmoid form implies the occurrence of an inflexion point in the rising part of the yield–effort curve and no decline in aggregated yield even at the highest effort levels observed. Aggregated CPUE declines steeply near the origin of the effort scale before stabilizing or rising to a local maximum and then declining inversely with further increases in effort. This highly nonlinear response suggests that extreme caution is required when interpreting aggregated CPUE as an indicator of fishing impacts on exploited communities. Further research is required to identify the mechanisms generating the observed relationship.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→