Local overfishing may be avoided by examining parameters of a spatio-temporal model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatial erosion of stock structure through local overfishing can lead to stock collapse because fish often prefer certain locations, and fisheries tend to focus on those locations. Fishery managers are challenged to maintain the integrity of the entire stock and require scientific approaches that provide them with sound advice. Here we propose a Bayesian hierarchical spatio-temporal modelling framework for fish abundance data to estimate key parameters that define spatial stock structure: persistence (similarity of spatial structure over time), connectivity (coherence of temporal pattern over space), and spatial variance (variation across the seascape). The consideration of these spatial parameters in the stock assessment process can help identify the erosion of structure and assist in preventing local overfishing. We use Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) in eastern Canada as a case study an examine the behaviour of these parameters from the height of the fishery through its collapse. We identify clear signals in parameter behaviour under circumstances of destructive stock erosion as well as for recovery of spatial structure even when combined with a non-recovery in abundance. Further, our model reveals the spatial pattern of areas of high and low density persists over the 41 years of available data and identifies the remnant patches. Models of this sort are crucial to recovery plans if we are to identify and protect remaining sources of recolonization for Atlantic cod. Our method is immediately applicable to other exploited species.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".