MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416404363 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8109072/v1

Large Fisheries Declines Linked to Compound and Extreme Climate Events

2025· preprint· W4416404363 on OpenAlexafffund
William W. L. Cheung, Thomas L. Frölicher, Juliano Palacios‐Abrantes, Isabella Morgante

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsProductivityFish stockClimate changeFood securityExtreme weatherEcosystemSubtropicsFishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Climate extremes are increasingly disrupting marine ecosystems and fisheries. However, evidence on extreme ocean temperature effects on fish stocks is mixed, and the combined impacts of heat and productivity extremes remain unclear. Using three decades of global data encompassing 6,659 time-series for 1,246 species across 254 regions, we conducted a risk-based analysis to quantify how local extreme high temperatures and low ocean productivity that these species were exposed to, alone and together, affect local fisheries catches. These events, particularly when compounded, sharply increase the likelihood of local extreme low catch events, especially in tropical and subtropical regions. Species critical to food security and conservation are disproportionately affected, with widespread risks in socio-economically vulnerable countries. Without adaptation, extreme events’ risks are projected to strongly intensify by the mid-21st century. Strengthening monitoring and climate-responsive fisheries management is urgently needed to build resilience.Main Text

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)0.004
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→