MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1984695774 · doi:10.1139/f10-049

Modelling fishing-induced adaptations and consequences for natural mortality

2010· article· en· W1984695774 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christian Jørgensen, Øyvind Fiksen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsFishingBiologyReproductionPredationMortality rateLife history theoryEcologyLife historyRange (aeronautics)Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When trade-offs involving predation and mortality are perturbed by human activities, behaviour and life histories are expected to change, with consequences for natural mortality rates. We present a general life history model for fish in which three common relationships link natural mortality to life history traits and behaviour. First, survival increases with body size. Second, survival declines with growth rate due to risks involved with resource acquisition and allocation. Third, fish that invest heavily in reproduction suffer from decreased survival due to costly reproductive behaviour or morphology that makes escapes from predators less successful. The model predicts increased natural mortality rate as an adaptive response to harvesting. This extends previous models that have shown that harvesting may cause smaller body size, higher growth rates, and higher investment in reproduction. The predicted increase in natural mortality is roughly half the fishing mortality over a wide range of harvest levels and parameter combinations such that fishing two fish kills three after evolutionary adaptations have taken place.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations64
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→