Phylogeny explains capture mortality of sharks and rays in pelagic longline fisheries: a global meta-analytic synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Apex and mesopredators such as elasmobranchs are important for maintaining ocean health and are the focus of conservation efforts to mitigate exposure to fishing and other anthropogenic hazards. Quantifying fishing mortality components such as at-vessel mortality (AVM) is necessary for effective bycatch management. We assembled a database for 61 elasmobranch species and conducted a global meta-synthesis to estimate pelagic longline AVM rates. Evolutionary history was a significant predictor of AVM, accounting for up to 13% of variance in Bayesian phylogenetic meta-regression models for Lamniformes and Carcharhiniformes clades. Phylogenetically related species may have a high degree of shared traits that explain AVM. Model-estimated posterior mean AVM rates ranged from 5% (95% HDI 0.1%-16%) for pelagic stingrays and 76% (95% HDI 49%-90%) for salmon sharks. Measures that reduce catch, and hence AVM levels, such as input controls, bycatch quotas and gear technology to increase selectivity are appropriate for species with higher AVM rates. In addition to reducing catchability, handling-and-release practices and interventions such as retention bans in shark sanctuaries and bans on shark finning and trade hold promise for species with lower AVM rates. Robust, and where applicable, phylogenetically-adjusted elasmobranch AVM rates are essential for evidence-informed bycatch policy.
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 | 0.021 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".