MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7045942519

Commercial fishing gear loss in Canada's Pacific Ocean: answering the why, where, and how with a mixed methods, transdisciplinary approach

2023· dissertation· en· W7045942519 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingCommercial fishingArtisanal fishingDistribution (mathematics)Fishing industry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Derelict fishing gear comprises a large portion of the world’s marine plastic pollution, causing damage to marine habitats, wildlife, and fishing industries globally. To mitigate these issues, managers and marine stakeholders must understand the reasons for, and areas of, fishing gear loss specific to their region. Additionally, regional case studies are important to add to the global literature on derelict gear research. I conducted a global review of reasons for commercial gear loss, and used the findings to design a commercial fisher questionnaire in Canada’s Pacific region as a case study. I carried out these dockside and on-line questionnaires to record commercial fishers’ experiences with lost gear. Additionally, I used a species distribution model approach to identify variables associated with presence of derelict gear. Lost gear presence data for the model came from both the questionnaire and existing data for the region, and results from the previous literature review and questionnaire informed which environmental and fishing variables to include. I then used results from the model to predict areas with high probability of derelict gear occurrence. The global review highlighted that the most common reasons for gear loss were interactions with other fishing vessels and their gear, marine weather, and snagging on submerged features. Questionnaire results with 29 fishers indicated that snagging gear on rough substrate was the most important reason for loss across all gear categories, and that Hecate Strait, Clayoquot Sound, and the Strait of Georgia were prevalent areas of gear loss. Through the questionnaire, fishers indicated various ways to reduce gear loss including: using high quality gear that is well maintained, knowledge sharing amongst the fleet, preventing overcrowding in fishing areas, and keeping static and active gear types away from each other. The species distribution model approach indicated that bathymetry, fishing effort, and wind were the most important variables in derelict gear occurrence and predicted the highest probability of gear loss in similar areas as the survey. These results can support removal efforts and management decisions to mitigate issues caused by derelict gear by increasing the scientific understanding of the topic in Canada’s Pacific region.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria)Same topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207