Five centuries of cod catches in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The fishery for Northern Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) off Newfoundland and Labrador, Eastern Canada, presents the most spectacular case of an exploited stock crashed in a few decades by an industrial bottom trawl fishery under a seemingly sophisticated management regime after half a millennium of sustainable fishing. The fishery, which had generated annual catches of 100000 to 200000 tonnes from the beginning of the 16th century to the 1950s, peaked in 1968 at 810000 tonnes, followed by a devastating collapse and closure 24 years later. Since then, stock recovery may have been hindered by premature openings, with vessels targeting the remains of the cod population. Previous research paid little attention towards using multicentury time series to inform sustainable catches and recovery plans. Here, we show that a simple stock assessment model can be used to model the cod population trajectory for the entire period from 1508 to 2019 for which catch estimates are available. The model suggests that if fishing effort and mortality had been stabilized in the 1980s, precautionary annual yields of about 200000 tonnes could have been sustained. Our analysis demonstrates the value of incorporating prior knowledge to counteract shifting baseline effects on reference points and contemporary perceptions of historical stock status.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".