MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976840387 · doi:10.1139/f05-079

Can commercial fishing cause evolution? Answers from guppies (<i>Poecilia reticulata</i>)

2005· article· en· W1976840387 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David N. Reznick, Cameron K. Ghalambor

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoeciliaFishingBiologyPredationEcologyNatural selectionMaturity (psychological)Mortality ratePredatorGuppyFisheryReproductionFish <Actinopterygii>ZoologyPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Life history theory predicts that high adult mortality rates select for earlier maturity and increased reproduction. If such evolution occurs in response to the commercial exploitation of natural fish populations, then the correlated reduction in body size would reduce the yield of the fishery. Earlier maturity and reduced body size are seen in commercially exploited populations. Here, we compare the life histories of natural populations of guppies (Poecilia reticulata) from Trinidad that live in either high- or low-predation environments, which serve as surrogates for the presence or absence of commercial fishing. We can quantify mortality rate and life history variables, including age and size at maturity, in the laboratory and in nature. We have manipulated mortality rates in nature and measured the rate of evolution. High mortality selects for earlier maturity at a smaller size, as observed in commercial fisheries and as predicted by theory. Furthermore, the nature and magnitude of predator-induced mortality are comparable to those caused by commercial fishing. The rate of evolution in guppies predicts similar evolution in commercial fisheries on a time scale of decades. These attributes support arguments that humans, like predators, have acted as an agent of selection when exploiting populations of fish.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations127
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207