Can bottom trawling disturbance increase food production for a commercial fish species?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fishery closures and marine protected areas are increasingly being used as tools to achieve sustainable fisheries. The “plaice box”, a gear restriction area in the North Sea that was established to reduce the bycatch of undersized plaice ( Pleuronectes platessa ), is considered ineffective because there has been a shift in the distribution of juvenile plaice to the waters that remained open to bottom trawlers. Here we examine the hypothesis that bottom trawling benefits the small benthic invertebrates that form the food source for plaice and that the plaice box had a negative impact on food production for plaice. A size-based model of benthic communities indicates that the production of prey was low without trawling and maximal in areas that are trawled once to twice a year. Therefore, bottom disturbance may improve the feeding conditions for species that feed on small invertebrates. As plaice aggregate at the locations with the highest benthic biomass, this may explain the observed redistribution to areas outside the plaice box. We conclude that the plaice box may not have been the most appropriate measure to protect plaice from discarding and that the species’ ecology should be considered when choosing the most appropriate management measure to achieve an objective.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".