CONTINUED DECLINE OF AN ATLANTIC COD POPULATION: HOW IMPORTANT IS GRAY SEAL PREDATION?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continental shelf ecosystem on the Eastern Scotian Shelf (ESS) has experienced drastic changes. Once common top predators are a small fraction of their historical abundance, and much of the current community structure is now dominated by pelagic fishes and invertebrates. Embedded within this food web, Atlantic cod and gray seal populations have recently exhibited nearly opposite trends. Since 1984, cod populations have decreased exponentially at a rate averaging 17% per year, whereas gray seals have continued to increase exponentially at a rate of 12%. We reexamined the impact of gray seals on Atlantic cod dynamics using more than 30 years of data on the population trends of cod and gray seals while incorporating new information on seal diet and seasonal distribution. The closure of the cod fishery over 10 years ago allowed for a better estimation of natural mortality rates. We quantified the impact of seals on ESS cod by (1) estimating trends in seal and cod abundance, (2) estimating the total energy needed for seal growth and maintenance from an energetics model, (3) using estimates of the percentage of cod in the total diet derived from quantitative fatty acid signature analysis (QFASA) and of the size-specific selectivity of cod consumed (derived from otoliths collected from fecal samples), and (4) assuming a gray seal functional response. Uncertainties of the model estimates were calculated using the Hessian approximation of the variance-covariance matrix. Between 1993 and 2000, cod comprised, on average, < 5% of a gray seal's diet. Our model shows that, since the closure of the fishery, gray seals have imposed a significant level of instantaneous mortality (0.21), and along with other unknown sources of natural mortality (0.62), are contributing to the failure of this cod stock to recover.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".