Community size spectra provide indicators of ecosystem recovery on the Newfoundland and Labrador shelf
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species- and size-selective overexploitation often have ecosystem-wide impacts that are evident in community size spectra. To both derive potential ecosystem targets for community rebuilding and assess contemporary indicators relative to these targets, we constructed theoretical size spectra to predict pristine biomass densities using a combination of species- and size-specific nitrogen stable isotope signatures and a range of trophic efficiencies and primary productivity estimates within and among 3 sub-regions of the Newfoundland and Labrador shelf. Theoretical size spectra were compared to empirically derived size spectra using trawl survey data. The descending slopes of the empirically determined size spectra were between 1.25 and 2.42 times steeper than the theoretical slopes. The percentage of the theoretical distribution represented by the empirical size structure ranged between 1.1 and 29.4%, with the closest and furthest estimates associated with the smallest- and largest-sized fishes, respectively, and strongly influenced by estimates of trophic efficiency and primary productivity. Regional variation was also observed, with southern regions reaching 1.3-32.3% of the theoretical biomass density and the northernmost region reaching only 0-8.3%. Importantly, the descending slopes varied depending on fish size, with biomass density of larger sizes decreasing faster than that of smaller sizes. Variations among sub-regions and fish guilds were also observed. These analyses provide a means to derive potential ecosystem targets and indicators through which recovery of fish communities can be monitored and assessed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".