A physiological perspective on fisheries‐induced evolution
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is increasing evidence that intense fishing pressure is not only depleting fish stocks but also causing evolutionary changes to fish populations. In particular, body size and fecundity in wild fish populations may be altered in response to the high and often size-selective mortality exerted by fisheries. While these effects can have serious consequences for the viability of fish populations, there are also a range of traits not directly related to body size which could also affect susceptibility to capture by fishing gears-and therefore fisheries-induced evolution (FIE)-but which have to date been ignored. For example, overlooked within the context of FIE is the likelihood that variation in physiological traits could make some individuals within species more vulnerable to capture. Specifically, traits related to energy balance (e.g., metabolic rate), swimming performance (e.g., aerobic scope), neuroendocrinology (e.g., stress responsiveness) and sensory physiology (e.g., visual acuity) are especially likely to influence vulnerability to capture through a variety of mechanisms. Selection on these traits could produce major shifts in the physiological traits within populations in response to fishing pressure that are yet to be considered but which could influence population resource requirements, resilience, species' distributions and responses to environmental change.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it