MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408824881 · doi:10.5194/oos2025-961

Operationalising Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Area Criteria for Ecosystem-Based Conservation and Management: The Bay of Biscay Case

2025· preprint· en· W4408824881 on OpenAlexaff
Olga Lukyanova, Sarai Pouso, Isabel García‐Barón, Ángel Borja, María Bas, Roland Cormier, Stelios Katsanevakis, Stefan Neuenfeldt, Vanessa Stelzenmüller, Ibon Galparsoro

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayEcosystemEnvironmental scienceMarine ecosystemEnvironmental resource managementGeographyOceanographyEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Achieving global and regional policy goals to protect 30% of marine areas by 2030 requires an integrated strategy that incorporates the full complexity of ecosystem processes and functions. This study (i) introduces a framework for enhancing ecosystem-based conservation and management by utilising the Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Area (EBSA) criteria established under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and (ii) demonstrates its application in the Bay of Biscay (Northeast Atlantic), explicitly accounting for benthic and pelagic aspects of the ocean environment.The framework provides a structured workflow for identifying the areas of high ecological significance within an analysed region, moving beyond single-species or habitat protection to incorporate ecosystem-level processes and stressors, including those driven by climate change. It guides key stages of EBSA criteria operationalisation, including area delineation, identification of target ecological features, data collection, evaluation of data quality and coverage, and spatial analysis and interpretation. This approach allows relative ecological significance to be assessed at a spatial resolution suitable for informing regional or national decision-making. An embedded method for evaluating data quality and spatial coverage further enables spatially explicit assessments of uncertainty and data gaps.The framework was tested in the Bay of Biscay, a transboundary region characterised by high productivity and structurally complex seafloor sustaining a rich diversity of marine life. Using a systematic conservation prioritization approach that integrates both benthic and pelagic realms and accounts for climate-driven changes, we demonstrate how diverse datasets can be aligned with EBSA criteria to evaluate ecological significance. This assessment offers valuable insights into key ecological processes and forms a foundation for ecosystem-based management, supporting the identification of priority areas for conservation while also informing broader marine spatial planning, such as guiding regulations of fisheries and other human activities.The showcased framework can be adapted in other regions, whether data-rich or data-poor, enhancing broader ecosystem-based conservation and spatial management efforts while ensuring transparency and reproducibility.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoastal and Marine Management→French-language works237,207→