MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083585439 · doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2025.107541

Influence of time-varying productivity on fishery reference points and implications for conservation objectives and management advice

2025· article· en· W7083585439 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEnvironmental Monitoring and Data Management
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans Canada
KeywordsProductivityFishingStock (firearms)Fisheries managementMaximum sustainable yieldManagement by objectivesOperationalizationControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providing science advice for fisheries management generally involves estimating reference points, commonly defined in terms of a proportion of the biomass at maximum sustainable yield or unfished biomass. These reference points assume a population in equilibrium, a premise frequently challenged by the time-varying productivity observed in many fish stocks. Reference points can serve as control points in harvest control rules (HCRs) and as indicators of stock status that can trigger a rebuilding plan. The guidance for addressing time-varying productivity varies among jurisdictions (e.g., using mean productivity over a time series or recent productivity only). Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) has recently identified a need for further research on time-varying reference points before providing policy guidance for use in fisheries management. In this study, we describe how individual components of productivity influence reference points using three generalized fish life-histories. We also assess the impact of alternative approaches (i.e., static vs. time-varying) to defining reference points on implied stock status (using the DFO status categories of critical, cautious, and healthy) and management advice using reference points as control points in HCRs. Using a static limit reference point (LRP) to operationalize DFO’s objective to avoid serious harm to stock productivity, we evaluate the performance of various HCRs under time-varying productivity, with control points defined via different productivity scenarios. We identify an HCR with a static biomass lower control point and a dynamic fishing mortality upper control point that has relatively high yields while maintaining a high probability of keeping the stock above the LRP. This HCR performs well across both increasing and decreasing productivity scenarios. An HCR with control points based only on recent productivity performed well under decreasing productivity only when stock biomass didn’t fall far below the LRP. We show that perceived stock status can vary from critical to healthy in a given year, depending on choice of productivity period used to define stock status reference points, implying that careful selection of such reference points is needed. There can be risks to using policy default approaches based solely on recent productivity when productivity is decreasing over time.

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.

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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.264 · 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