MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406525686 · doi:10.1038/s43247-024-01851-4

Introducing maximum sustainable yield targets in fisheries could enhance global food security

2025· article· en· W4406525686 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christian Elleby, Ignácio Pérez Domínguez, Rasmus Nielsen, Max Nielsen, Ayoe Hoff

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Earth & Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsFood securityYield (engineering)Maximum sustainable yieldFisheryNatural resource economicsBusinessSustainable agricultureEnvironmental scienceAgricultural economicsFisheries managementSustainabilityEconomicsFishingAgricultureEcologyBiologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aquatic foods are crucial for global food and nutrition security, but overfishing has led to depleted fish stocks, threatening both food security and the environment. Here, we combine a fish stock model with a global agriculture and food market model in order to analyze scenarios involving a continuation of current fishing trends versus optimal management through maximum sustainable yield targets. Maximum sustainable yield management of overfished stocks could increase yields by 10.6 Megatons, equivalent to 12% of total catches and 6% of aquatic animal production in 2022. This would alleviate the need for aquaculture expansion by an equivalent of 3 years of growth in the aquaculture sector at its current level, and reduce meat and feed demand. Lower food prices and additional supply could enhance global food security. Conversely, continued overfishing will likely lead to lower catches over time, adding pressure to the agricultural and aquaculture sectors. Although maximum sustainable yield management is not a panacea, it represents a positive step towards achieving sustainable food production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications Earth & EnvironmentSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207