An assessment of the protected Gilbert Bay cod population and evaluation of factors driving observed changes in abundance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Gilbert Bay Marine Protected Area (MPA), Labrador, was created in 2005 to conserve a coastal resident population of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). Scientific research and monitoring have been conducted consistently since 1998, and data have been used to assess the health of the Gilbert Bay cod population and provide management advice. This study has two parts: the first part applies a standard quantitative fisheries stock assessment methodology (length-based stock assessment) to provide growth and mortality parameters; and the second part considers all available MPA indicator monitoring data to evaluate which factors contribute most importantly to observed long-term population trends using Bayesian Model Averaging. Model results indicated that Gilbert Bay cod exhibit low growth rates and low natural mortality. It estimated that the protected population decreased from ~39,000 to ~9,000 individuals from 1998 to 2019. Those remaining individuals are mostly sexually immature and <35 cm total length (TL). In the second part of the study, monitoring data, including environmental metrics, annual abundances of cod eggs, pelagic juveniles, demersal juveniles (ages 1–4 years.), adults, and fishery removals, are used to assess which factors contributed most importantly to the observed population trends over time. Commercial cod landings adjacent the MPA boundaries explained 89.2% of the variability in cod egg density and 100% of the changes in adult fish abundance. Environmental conditions had a negligible role in cod population decline. Despite changes in fish community structure within Gilbert Bay, a reduction in fishing mortality on mature Gilbert Bay cod could enable the survival of strong year classes and promote recovery of the Gilbert Bay cod population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".