Effects of predatorprey interactions and adaptive change on sustainable yield
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explore the effects on population size and yield of different levels of harvesting of a predator in a predatorprey system. We consider the consequences of adaptive change in the predator's foraging time (or effort) and feedback control of fishing effort. The predator may increase in population size with increasing fishing effort, either when the prey is characterized by a positive effect of its own population size on its own growth rate or when the prey is overexploited by the predator. The predator abundance at which the sustainable yield is maximized can be larger than the abundance without fishing. The effort that achieves maximum sustainable yield and the effort that maximizes predator abundance can both be close to the effort at which the stock collapses. Feedback control in the response to predator abundance may fail to achieve the desired abundance of the target stock or its prey even if the fishing effort is well controlled. These results suggest that developing policies for exploiting adaptive predator species in potentially cycling systems cannot be based on the stable single-species models often used in fisheries management.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".