Global reconstruction of life‐history strategies: A case study using tunas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Measuring the demographic parameters of exploited populations is central to predicting their vulnerability and extinction risk. However, current rates of population decline and species loss greatly outpace our ability to empirically monitor all populations that are potentially threatened. The scale of this problem cannot be addressed through additional data collection alone, and therefore it is a common practice to conduct population assessments based on surrogate data collected from similar species. However, this approach introduces biases and imprecisions that are difficult to quantify. Recent developments in hierarchical modelling have enabled missing values to be reconstructed based on the correlations between available life‐history data, linking similar species based on phylogeny and environmental conditions. However, these methods cannot resolve life‐history variability among populations or species that are closely placed spatially or taxonomically. Here, theoretically motivated constraints that align with life‐history theory offer a new avenue for addressing this problem. We describe a Bayesian hierarchical approach that combines fragmented, multispecies and multi‐population data with established life‐history theory, in order to objectively determine similarity between populations based on trait correlations (life‐history trade‐offs) obtained from model fitting. We reconstruct 59 unobserved life‐history parameters for 23 populations of tuna that sustain some of the world's most valuable fisheries. Testing by cross‐validation across different scenarios indicated that life‐histories were accurately reconstructed when information was available for other populations of the same species. The reconstruction of several traits was also accurate for species represented by a single population, although credible intervals increased dramatically. Synthesis and applications. The described Bayesian hierarchical method provides access to life‐history traits that are difficult to measure directly and reconstructs missing life‐history information useful for assessing populations and species that are directly or indirectly affected by human exploitation of natural resources. The method is particularly useful for examining populations that are spatially or taxonomically similar, and the reconstructed life‐history strategies described for the principal market tunas have immediate application to the world‐wide management of these fisheries.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".