Evolutionary response to size-selective mortality in an exploited fish population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many collapsed fish populations have failed to recover after a decade or more with little fishing. This may reflect evolutionary change in response to the highly selective mortality imposed by fisheries. Recent experimental work has demonstrated a rapid genetic change in growth rate in response to size-selective harvesting of laboratory fish populations. Here, we use a 30-year time-series of back-calculated lengths-at-age to test for a genetic response to size-selective mortality in the wild in a heavily exploited population of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). Controlling for the effects of density- and temperature-dependent growth, the change in mean length of 4-year-old cod between offspring and their parental cohorts was positively correlated with the estimated selection differential experienced by the parental cohorts between this age and spawning. This result supports the hypothesis that there have been genetic changes in growth in this population in response to size-selective fishing. Such changes may account for the continued small size-at-age in this population despite good conditions for growth and little fishing for over a decade. This study highlights the need for management regimes that take into account the evolutionary consequences of fishing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".