Predation Scars Reveal Declines in Crab Populations Since the Pleistocene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite growing concerns over global fisheries, the stock status of most commercially exploited species are poorly understood. Fossil data provide pre-anthropogenic baselines for data-poor fisheries, yet are underutilized in fisheries management. Here, we provide the first use of predation traces to assess the status of fisheries (crab). We compared crab predation traces on living individuals of the crab prey gastropod, Tegula funebralis, to Pleistocene individuals from the same regions in southern California. There were fewer crab predation traces on modern gastropods than their Pleistocene counterparts, revealing reductions in crab abundances today compared to the Pleistocene. We conclude that: (1) regardless of the cause, immediate actions are required to avoid further population reductions of commercially exploited crabs in southern California, (2) predation traces are a rapid, cost-effective method to assess otherwise data-poor fisheries, and (3) the inclusion of fossil data provides key new insights for modern resource and fisheries management.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".