Changes in the exploited demersal fish assemblages in the Southern Grand Banks (NAFO Divisions 3NO): 2002–2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Newfoundland Shelf supported one of the world’s greatest fisheries until the main commercial species collapsed more than two decades ago. We calculated three ecological indices for individual populations and five for community from the data obtained in the research surveys conducted by Spain in NAFO Regulatory Area Divisions 3NO between 2002 and 2013. We use data for 24 species to study the dynamics of major demersal fish assemblages (38–300, 301–600, and 601–1460 m depth) and evaluated how they have responded to different levels of exploitation. Trends and changes for individual populations (abundance and biomass, intrinsic population rate of growth, and mean length) and for all the community (ABC curves, indices of faunal diversity, proportion of non-commercial species, mean length in community and size spectra) were used to test ecological trends. Indices showed no homogeneous status and responded to different exploitation patterns, management, and environmental regimes in each assemblage. Our results show an improvement in the shallower and deeper assemblages and that fishing effort does not explain differences among each assemblage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".