Trends in the size and age structure of marine fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Size-selective harvesting is expected to reduce the average age and weight of commercially exploited fishes. The loss of larger, older fish has been hypothesized to negatively affect metrics of population viability, such as spawning behaviour, recruitment, and adult survival. Most studies to date have focussed on individual stocks. Here, we examine trends in average age and weight at broad taxonomic and temporal scales, using subsets of data compiled on 95 marine fish stocks. Following moderate declines between 1960 and 1990, we find that the average age has generally increased since 2000, such that 71% of 69 stocks are currently above their long-term average. However, the size of the oldest individuals has generally declined over time; the average weight is currently below average in 75% of 55 stocks. A temporal decline in the mean weight of the youngest constituents within 49 stocks is most evident in the Clupeiformes. Our results indicate that recovery of age structure need not be accompanied by recovery of weights-at-age, evidenced in part by a decline in the size of the oldest individuals within populations. Further study into the drivers of these patterns, and the consequences of declining weights-at-age for population viability, is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".