MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530487035 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0170

Evaluation of harvest strategies for pelagic sharks taking ecological characteristics into consideration: an example for North Pacific blue shark

2016· article· en· W2530487035 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mikihiko Kai, Hiroki Yokoi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFisheries Agency
KeywordsPelagic zoneMaximum sustainable yieldFisheryBiomass (ecology)BiologyFisheries managementPopulationSustainable yieldEcologyFishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed a population dynamics model that considers the spatial segregation by sex and ontogenetic stages of pelagic sharks. The model was used to evaluate the performance of harvest strategies based on ecological characteristics. We proposed five harvest strategies for longline fisheries based on the ecological characteristics of blue shark (Prionace glauca) in the North Pacific. Management objectives for depleted populations are to increase yield to the level that provides maximum sustainable yield through increases in biomass without collapsing the fishery. Deterministic and stochastic analyses were undertaken. We determined that the harvest of male sharks was robust to uncertainty of environmental changes, reducing the likelihood of fishery collapse and stabilizing yield and mean biomass. The harvest of male sharks was also robust to the uncertainties of biological parameters such as natural mortality and steepness. These results suggested that if there was no sperm limitation or impact on the mating behavior of the species, the harvest of males would be the most appropriate harvest strategy for blue shark in the North Pacific.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207