Ecological repercussions of historical fish extraction from the Southern Ocean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A major mid‐1980s shift in ecological structure of significant portions of the Southern Ocean was partially due to the serial depletion of fish by intensive industrial fishing, rather than solely to climate factors as previously hypothesized. Over a brief period (1969–1973), several finfish stocks were on average reduced to <50%, and finally (mid‐1980s) to <20%, of original size. Despite management actions, few stocks have recovered and some are still declining. Most affected species exhibit K‐selected life‐history patterns, and before exploitation presumably fluctuated in accordance with infrequent strong year classes, as is true of such fish elsewhere. A climate regime, the Southern Annular Mode, once oscillated between two states, but has remained in its ‘positive mode’ since the time of the fish extraction. This may have increased finfish vulnerability to exploitation. As breeding stocks decreased, we hypothesize that availability of annually produced juvenile fish fed upon by upper‐level predators remained low. Correlations between predator populations and fish biomass in predator foraging areas indicate that southern elephant seal Mirounga leonina , Antarctic fur seal Arctocephalus gazella , gentoo penguin Pygoscelis papua , macaroni penguin Eudyptes chrysolphus and ‘imperial’ shag Phalacrocorax spp. – all feeding extensively on these fish, and monitored at Marion, Crozet, Kerguelen, Heard, South Georgia, South Orkney and South Shetland Islands, where fishing was concentrated – declined simultaneously during the two periods of heavy fishing. These patterns indicate the past importance of demersal fish as prey in Antarctic marine systems, but determining these interactions’ ecological mechanisms may now be impossible.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".