MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2292947141 · doi:10.1002/ece3.2012

Ten principles from evolutionary ecology essential for effective marine conservation

2016· review· en· W2292947141 on OpenAlexafffund
Holly K. Kindsvater, Marc Mangel, John D. Reynolds, Nicholas K. Dulvy

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSustainabilityLife history theoryEcologyPopulationPopulation growthContext (archaeology)BiologyConservation biologyLife historyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental ethicsSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sustainably managing marine species is crucial for the future health of the human population. Yet there are diverse perspectives concerning which species can be exploited sustainably, and how best to do so. Motivated by recent debates in the published literature over marine conservation challenges, we review ten principles connecting life-history traits, population growth rate, and density-dependent population regulation. We introduce a framework for categorizing life histories, POSE (Precocial-Opportunistic-Survivor-Episodic), which illustrates how a species' life-history traits determine a population's compensatory capacity. We show why considering the evolutionary context that has shaped life histories is crucial to sustainable management. We then review recent work that connects our framework to specific opportunities where the life-history traits of marine species can be used to improve current conservation practices.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations134
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems StudiesFrench-language works237,207