Application of Omics Tools in Designing and Monitoring Marine Protected Areas For a Sustainable Blue Economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A key component of the global blue economy strategy is the sustainable extraction of marine resources and conservation of marine environments through networks of marine protected areas (MPAs). Connectivity and representativity are essential factors that underlie successful implementation of MPA networks, which can safeguard biological diversity and ecosystem function, and ultimately support the blue economy strategy by balancing ocean use with conservation. New "big data" omics approaches, including genomics and transcriptomics, are becoming essential tools for the development and maintenance of MPA networks. Current molecular omics techniques, including population-scale genome sequencing, have direct applications for assessing population connectivity and for evaluating how genetic variation is represented within and among MPAs. Effective baseline characterization and long-term, scalable, and comprehensive monitoring are essential for successful MPA management, and omics approaches hold great promise to characterize the full range of marine life, spanning the microbiome to megafauna across a range of environmental conditions (shallow sea to the deep ocean). Omics tools, such as eDNA metabarcoding can provide a cost-effective basis for biodiversity monitoring in large and remote conservation areas. Here we provide an overview of current omics applications for conservation planning and monitoring, with a focus on metabarcoding, metagenomics, and population genomics. Emerging approaches, including whole-genome sequencing, characterization of genomic architecture, epigenomics, and genomic vulnerability to climate change are also reviewed. We demonstrate that the operationalization of omics tools can enhance the design, monitoring, and management of MPAs and thus will play an important role in a modern and comprehensive blue economy strategy.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".