Hierarchical approach to the assessment of fishing effects on non-target chondrichthyans: case study of <i>Squalus megalops</i> in southeastern Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A three-levelled hierarchical risk assessment approach was trialed using piked spurdog (Squalus megalops) to evaluate the suitability of the approach for chondrichthyan species. At level 1, a qualitative assessment indicated that the only fishing-related activity to have moderate or high impact on S. megalops was "capture fishing" by otter trawl, Danish seine, gillnet, and automatic longline methods. At level 2, a semi-quantitative assessment ranked S. megalops at risk because of its low biological productivity and, possibly, its catch susceptibility from cumulative effects across the separate fishing methods. Finally, at level 3, a quantitative assessment showed that population growth is slow even under the assumption of density-dependent compensation where the fishing mortality rate equals the natural mortality rate. Although published information indicates that relative abundance has been stable in several regions of southern Australia, it is concluded that given its low biological productivity, changed fishing practices leading to increased fishing mortality could quickly put S. megalops at high risk. The hierarchical approach appears particularly useful for assessment of chondrichthyan species in data-limited fisheries. This approach allows for a management response at any level, optimizing research and management efforts by identifying and excluding low-risk species from data intensive assessments.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".