Global population trajectories of tunas and their relatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tunas and their relatives dominate the world's largest ecosystems and sustain some of the most valuable fisheries. The impacts of fishing on these species have been debated intensively over the past decade, giving rise to divergent views on the scale and extent of the impacts of fisheries on pelagic ecosystems. We use all available age-structured stock assessments to evaluate the adult biomass trajectories and exploitation status of 26 populations of tunas and their relatives (17 tunas, 5 mackerels, and 4 Spanish mackerels) from 1954 to 2006. Overall, populations have declined, on average, by 60% over the past half century, but the decline in the total adult biomass is lower (52%), driven by a few abundant populations. The trajectories of individual populations depend on the interaction between life histories, ecology, and fishing pressure. The steepest declines are exhibited by two distinct groups: the largest, longest lived, highest value temperate tunas and the smaller, short-lived mackerels, both with most of their populations being overexploited. The remaining populations, mostly tropical tunas, have been fished down to approximately maximum sustainable yield levels, preventing further expansion of catches in these fisheries. Fishing mortality has increased steadily to the point where around 12.5% of the tunas and their relatives are caught each year globally. Overcapacity of these fisheries is jeopardizing their long-term sustainability. To guarantee higher catches, stabilize profits, and reduce collateral impacts on marine ecosystems requires the rebuilding of overexploited populations and stricter management measures to reduce overcapacity and regulate threatening trade.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".