Estimation of the parameters of fish stock dynamics from catch-at-age data and indices of abundance: can natural and fishing mortality be separated?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Models for fluctuations in size of fish stocks must include parameters that describe expected dynamics, as well as stochastic influences. In addition, reliable population projections also require assessments about the uncertainties in estimates of vital parameters. Here we develop an age-structured model of population dynamics based on catch-at-age data and indices of abundance in which the natural and fishing mortality are separated in a Bayesian state–space model. Markov chain Monte Carlo methods are used to fit the model to the data. The model is fitted to a data set of 19 years for Northeast Arctic cod (Gadus morhua). By simulations of the fitted model we show that the model captures the dynamical pattern of natural mortality adequately, whereas the absolute size of natural mortality is difficult to estimate. Access to long time series of high-quality data are necessary for obtaining precise estimates of all the parameters in the model, but some parameters cannot be estimated without including some prior information. Nevertheless, our model demonstrates that temporal variability in natural mortality strongly affects perceived variability in stock sizes. Thus, using estimation procedures that neglect temporal fluctuations in natural mortality may therefore give biased estimates of fluctuations in fish stock sizes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".