Worldwide distributions of tuna larvae: revisiting hypotheses on environmental requirements for spawning habitats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tuna are among the most ubiquitous oceanic predators, and range globally from the equator to temperate regions (0 to 55 latitude). While the distribution of adult fish has been mapped from fishing records, the extent of tuna spawning and larval habitats is less well understood. We compiled and analyzed data on the global distributions of larval occurrence for 7 major oceanic tuna species to investigate environmental predictors of larval habitat. Our results showed that tuna larvae occur within the adults' distributional range, but were restricted to lower latitudes and higher water temperatures than adults, largely consistent with Schaefer's 'temperature hypothesis'. Temperature requirements explained much of the variation in larval occurrence, though temperature by itself tended to over-predict the extent of larval habitats. We also demonstrate that tuna larvae have an elevated probability of occurrence at intermediate values of eddy kinetic energy, generally supporting Bakun's 'ocean triad hypothesis', which relates tuna larval habitats to mesoscale oceanographic activity. However, some deviations in this pattern were also observed, such as for albacore. Regions of suitable larval habitats were most commonly found in western boundary currents, where warm water masses coincide with intermediate eddy kinetic energy. Bluefin tuna species are exceptional though, in that their spawning habitats tended to be much more confined than predicted from oceanographic conditions. Our results provide support for a combination of the 2 hypotheses to explain global environmental requirements for tuna larvae. We have identified oceanographic parameters that can easily be measured by remote sensing and features that should be considered when determining areas of critical habitat for tuna larvae.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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 teacher head, 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".