MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3130187639 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0239503

Fish harvesting advice under climate change: A risk-equivalent empirical approach

2021· article· en· W3130187639 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel E. Duplisea, Marie‐Julie Roux, Karen L. Hunter, Jake Rice

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingClimate changeFish stockFisheryFisheries managementStock (firearms)SustainabilityEnvironmental resource managementStock assessmentEmpirical researchEnvironmental scienceBusinessEcologyGeographyStatisticsBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of climate change (CC) has accelerated to the point where it now affects the mid- to long-term sustainability of fishing strategies. Therefore, it is important to consider practical and effective ways to incorporate CC into fisheries advice so that the advice can be considered conditioned to CC. We developed a model to characterise the empirical relationship between a variable affected by climate and fish production. We then used model projections as a foundation for a risk analysis of CC effects on harvesting of Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides in the Gulf of St Lawrence, Canada. The risk-based approach quantified a) the relative change in risk of a status quo fishing strategy under various CC scenarios, and b) the change in fishery exploitation rates required to achieve a management objective over a specified time period at a level of risk considered acceptable (risk equivalent fishery exploitation advice). This empirical approach can be used to develop risk-based advice for any other external variable that affects stock production in addition to climate-related variables and it can be applied in most situations where there is an index of stock biomass and fisheries catch. Shifting the focus from process-based understanding of the responses of fish stocks to CC to quantification of how CC-contributed uncertainty can alter the risks associated with different fishing strategies and/or management options, can ensure timely delivery of robust scientific advice for fisheries under non-stationary environmental conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.158
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.137 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→