An index to assess the risk to stony corals from bottom trawling on seamounts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stony (scleractinian) corals are common on seamounts and can form extensive reef‐like structures which in turn provide important habitat for associated species. Aggregations of fish also occur on seamounts, which in recent decades have become the target of commercial bottom trawl fisheries that have damaging impacts on benthic communities. Such fisheries occur throughout the world’s oceans, and the majority are located on seamounts about which little is known of their biodiversity or likely fisheries impact. Here we develop an index of risk for stony corals on seamount summits. The index combines a metric of vulnerability measured by the coincidence of seamount summits, target fish ranges and likelihood of coral presence with an assessment of likely fisheries impact derived from a fishing intensity effects study and fishing effort‐catch data. We provide spatial maps depicting the locations of vulnerable seamount features, and those at particular risk to bottom trawling. Application of the risk index may help to provide guidance to fisheries or environmental managers faced with balancing fisheries management and habitat conservation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".