MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409718077 · doi:10.1139/facets-2024-0234

Dynamic shifts and a drastic decline in reported landings for southern Gulf of St. Lawrence commercial clam fisheries over the past two decades

2025· article· en· W4409718077 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jeff C. Clements

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFisheryOceanographyGeographyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clams constitute an important socioeconomic and Indigenous resource in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence (sGSL); however, detailed analyses of commercial clam fisheries are outdated. I provide a synthesis of sGSL clam landings from 2003 to 2022. Three species comprised >99% of landings: Mya arenaria, Mercenaria mercenaria, and Spisula solidissima. Annual landings mostly came from Prince Edward Island (75 ± 7%; mean ± standard deviation), followed by New Brunswick (23 ± 6%) and Nova Scotia (2 ± 2%). For the sGSL as a whole, the three species contributed equally to landings from 2003 to 2020, but Mya arenaria dominated landings from 2021 to 2022. This trend was not consistent for individual provinces: province-specific fluctuations in species composition and a contemporary shift from multi-species to single-species harvests were evident. Overall, landings and their associated value sharply declined by 80% and 74%, respectively, over the time series. The number of catch records (i.e., active licenses and Supplement B records) also declined by 80%, suggesting progressively fewer people entering clam fisheries. Annual catch records were a strong predictor of annual landings, and declines in landings per catch record (proxy of CPUE) were apparent. This analysis ultimately suggests a dwindling Canadian fishery. Understanding the proximate causes of fishery declines, how to address them, and determining whether such declines reflect population trends, should be prioritized.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicMarine Bivalve and Aquaculture StudiesFrench-language works237,207