Into the Deep: Origins and Evolution of Northeastern Pacific Ocean Tuna (<scp><i>Thunnus</i></scp> spp.) Fisheries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT People have had a profound influence on Earth's biodiversity for millennia, culminating in Anthropocene environmental degradation and the modern biodiversity crisis. While the scale and extent of people's long‐term influence on Earth's biodiversity in terrestrial and nearshore marine ecosystems are relatively well studied, there are significant questions about the antiquity and evolution of people's influence on pelagic ecosystems and organisms. We explore the Holocene history of human interactions with offshore marine organisms and ecosystems by integrating archaeological and historical perspectives on the origins and expansion of northeastern Pacific Ocean tuna (Thunnus spp.) fisheries. Indigenous people from the Pacific Coast of Canada to Baja California fished for tuna for > 5000 years, but tuna were generally not one of the most abundant species targeted by Indigenous fisheries, which largely focused on nearshore kelp forest, rocky reef and estuary habitats. The scale of Indigenous tuna fisheries is relatively small when compared to capitalist commercial fisheries, which commenced by the onset of the 20th century, rapidly accelerated during World War I and II, and declined by the mid‐1980s or earlier. Although Indigenous people fished for tuna in the northeastern Pacific for millennia, significant human use of and influence on offshore ecosystems in the northeastern Pacific is primarily associated with the mid‐20th century Great Acceleration and associated global ecological impacts. These data illustrate the important role of people as a driving force in marine habitats for millennia but demonstrate that strong anthropogenic influence on nearshore coastal ecosystems appeared several millennia before those of offshore ecosystems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".