Chinook salmon diversity contributes to fishery stability and trade‐offs with mixed‐stock harvest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variation among populations in life history and intrinsic population characteristics (i.e., population diversity) helps maintain resilience to environmental change and dampen interannual variability in ecosystem services. As a result, ecological variation, and the processes that generate it, is considered central to strategies for managing risks to ecosystems in an increasingly variable and uncertain world. However, characterizing population diversity is difficult, particularly in large and remote regions, which often prevents its formal consideration in management advice. We combined genetic stock identification of archived scale and tissue samples with state-space run-reconstruction models to estimate migration timing and annual return abundance for eight geographically and genetically distinct Chinook salmon populations within the Canadian portion of the Yukon River. We found that among-population variation in migration timing and return abundances resulted in aggregate return migrations that were 2.1 times longer and 1.4 times more stable than if they had composed a single homogeneous population. We then fit state-space spawner-recruitment models to the annual return abundances to characterize among-population diversity in intrinsic productivity and population size and their consequences for the fisheries they support. Productivity and carrying capacity varied among populations by approximately 2.4-fold (2.9 to 6.9 recruits per spawner) and three-fold (8800 to 27,000 spawners), respectively. This diversity implies an equilibrium trade-off between harvesting of the population aggregate and the conservation of individual populations whereby the harvest rate predicted to maximize aggregate harvests comes at the cost of overfishing ~40% of the populations but with a relatively low risk of extirpating the weakest ones. Our findings illustrate how population diversity in one of the largest salmon-producing river basins in the world contributes to fishery stability and food security in a region where salmon have high cultural and subsistence value. More generally, our work demonstrates the utility of molecular analyses of archived biological material for characterizing diversity in biological systems and its benefits and consequences for trade-offs in decision-making.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".