Evolution of boldness and life history in response to selective harvesting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whether intensive harvesting alters the behavioral repertoire of exploited fishes is currently unknown, but plausible. We extend a fish life-history model to account for boldness as a personality trait that affects foraging intensity, which affects energy intake and risk from predation and fishing gear. We systematically investigate life-history and behavioral trait evolution along the boldness–timidity axis in response to the full range of common selectivity and exploitation patterns in fisheries. In agreement with previous studies, we find that any type of harvesting selects for fast life histories and that merely elevated, yet unselective, fishing mortality favors boldness. We also find that timid-selective fishing (which can be expected in species targeted by active gear types) selects for increased boldness. By contrast, increased timidity is predicted when fishing targets bolder individuals common to passive gears, whether in combination with selection on size or not. Altered behavior caused by intensive harvesting should be commonplace in nature, which can have far-reaching ecological, evolutionary, and managerial impacts. Evolution of timidity is expected to strongly erode catchability, which will negatively affect human well-being and influence the reliability of stock assessments that rely on fishery-dependent data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".