Use of a marine reserve to determine the direct and indirect effects of fishing on growth in a New Zealand fishery for the spiny lobster <i>Jasus edwardsii</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of fishing on growth in a spiny lobster, Jasus edwardsii , were explored by using a no-take marine reserve as a control for these effects. We analysed data from lobster tag–recapture studies outside the reserve from 1975 until the present and tag–recapture from inside the reserve during a recent 8-year study. We explored whether recent and historical data showed similar growth and, using catch per unit effort (CPUE) data from research potting and commercial returns, whether growth rates in this lobster species were affected by population density. Despite the confounded nature of the data, recent growth rates appeared to be lower than in earlier years, growth appeared weakly density-dependent, and the reserve appeared to have a positive effect on lobster growth. The strongest effect was the time period, but the density-dependent and reserve effects appeared real. The reserve effect suggests a negative effect of handling of sublegal-sized lobsters on growth.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".