MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145082928 · doi:10.1139/f2011-090

The illusion of plenty: hyperstability masks collapses in two recreational fisheries that target fish spawning aggregations

2011· article· en· W2145082928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brad Erisman, Larry G. Allen, Jeremy T. Claisse, Daniel J. Pondella, Éric Miller, Jason Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWalton Family FoundationDavid and Lucile Packard Foundation
KeywordsFisheryOverfishingCatch per unit effortFishingStock (firearms)Stock assessmentRecreational fishingPopulationFish stockGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fisheries that target fish spawning aggregations can exhibit hyperstability, in which catch per unit effort (CPUE) remains elevated as stock abundance declines, but empirical support is limited. We compiled several fishery-dependent and fishery-independent data sets to assess stock trends in the barred sand bass ( Paralabrax nebulifer ) and the kelp bass ( Paralabrax clathratus ) in southern California, USA, evaluate the interaction between spawning aggregations and fishing activities, and test for hyperstability. Annual and seasonal trends from fisheries and population data indicate that regional stocks of both species have collapsed in response to overfishing of spawning aggregations and changes in environmental conditions. The aggregating behavior of fish and persistent targeting of spawning aggregations by recreational fisheries combined to produce a hyperstable relationship between CPUE and stock abundance in both species, which created the illusion that population levels were stable and masked fishery collapses. Differences in the rate of decline between the two species may be related to the size, duration, and spatial distribution of their spawning aggregations. Results of this study provide empirical evidence of hyperstability in aggregation-based fisheries and demonstrate that CPUE data be used with caution and given low weight when fishery-independent data are available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations307
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207