Ecosystem indicators—accounting for variability in species’ trophic levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trophic level (TL)-based indicators are commonly used to track the ecosystem effects of fishing as the selective removal of organisms from the food web may result in changes to the trophic structure of marine ecosystems. The use of a fixed TL per species in the calculation of TL-based indicators has been questioned, given that species’ TLs vary with ontogeny, as well as over time and space. We conducted a model-based assessment of the performance of fixed TL-based indicators vs. variable TL-based indicators for tracking the effects of fishing pressure. This assessment considered three TL-based indicators (the trophic level of the landed catch (TLc), the marine trophic index (MTI) and the trophic level of the surveyed community (TLsc)), three fishing scenarios that targeted specific model groups (the low TL scenario (LTL), the high TL scenario (HTL) and a scenario encompassing broad-scale exploitation (ALL)) and ten contrasting marine ecosystems with four types of ecosystem modelling approaches that differ in their structure and assumptions. Results showed that, overall, variable TL-based indicators have a greater capacity for detecting the effects of fishing pressure than fixed TL-based indicators. Across TL-based indicators, TLsc displayed the most consistent response to fishing whether fixed or variable species' TLs were used, as well as the highest capacity for detecting fishing effects. This result supports previous studies that promote the use of survey-based indicators over catch-based indicators to explore the impacts of fishing on the structure of marine ecosystems. Across fishing scenarios, the low trophic level fishing scenario (LTL) resulted in the lowest consistency between fixed and variable TL-based indicator responses and the lowest capacity of TL-based indicators for detecting fishing effects. Overall, our results speak to the need for caution when interpreting TL-based indicator trends, and knowledge of the broader context, such as fishing strategies and exploitation history.
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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".