Little change in plastic loads in South Atlantic seabirds since the 1980s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite growing concern about the large amounts of waste plastic in marine ecosystems, evidence of an increase in the amount of floating plastic at sea has been mixed. Both at-sea surveys and ingested plastic loads in seabirds show inconsistent evidence of significant increases in the amount of plastic since the 1980s. We use 3727 brown skua Catharacta antarctica regurgitations, each containing the remains of a single seabird, to monitor changes in plastic loads in four seabird taxa breeding at Inaccessible Island, Tristan da Cunha in nine years from 1987 to 2018. Frequency of occurrence in plastic ingestion and types were compared across four near-decadal time periods (1987-1989; 1999-2004; 2009-2014 and 2018) while loads were compared among years. The number and proportions of industrial pellets among ingested plastic decreased consistently over the study period in all four taxa, suggesting that industry initiatives to reduce pellet leakage have reduced the numbers of pellets at sea. Despite global plastic production increasing more than four-fold over the study period, there was no consistent increase in the total amount of ingested plastic in any species. Plastic loads in great shearwaters Ardenna gravis, which spend the austral winter in the North Atlantic Ocean, increased in 2018, but the proportion of shearwaters containing plastic decreased. We conclude that the density of plastic floating at sea has not increased in line with global production over the last 30 years.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".