Exploring multiple stressor effects with Ecopath, Ecosim, and Ecospace: Research designs, modeling techniques, and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the cumulative effects of multiple stressors is a research priority in environmental science. Ecological models are a key component of tackling this challenge because they can simulate interactions between the components of an ecosystem. Here, we ask, how has the popular modeling platform Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) been used to model human impacts related to climate change, land and sea use, pollution, and invasive species? We conducted a literature review encompassing 166 studies covering stressors other than fishing mostly in aquatic ecosystems. The most modeled stressors were physical climate change (60 studies), species introductions (22), habitat loss (21), and eutrophication (20), using a range of modeling techniques. Despite this comprehensive coverage, we identified four gaps that must be filled to harness the potential of EwE for studying multiple stressor effects. First, only 12% of studies investigated three or more stressors, with most studies focusing on single stressors. Furthermore, many studies modeled only one of many pathways through which each stressor is known to affect ecosystems. Second, various methods have been applied to define environmental response functions representing the effects of single stressors on species groups. These functions can have a large effect on the simulated ecological changes, but best practices for deriving them are yet to emerge. Third, human dimensions of environmental change - except for fisheries - were rarely considered. Fourth, only 3% of studies used statistical research designs that allow attribution of simulated ecosystem changes to stressors' direct effects and interactions, such as factorial (computational) experiments. None made full use of the statistical possibilities that arise when simulations can be repeated many times with controlled changes to the inputs. We argue that all four gaps are feasibly filled by integrating ecological modeling with advances in other subfields of environmental science and in computational statistics.
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 | 0.084 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".