Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28056064›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2017

Marine Reserve Targets to Sustain and Rebuild Unregulated Fisheries.

Nils C Krueck, Gabby N Ahmadia, Hugh P Possingham, Cynthia Riginos, Eric A Treml, Peter J Mumby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Assessing the population-level conservation effects of marine protected areas.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Evaluating sustainable development policies in rural coastal economies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  12. Relating characteristics of global biodiversity targets to reported progress.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2019
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Gravity of human impacts mediates coral reef conservation gains.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nils C KrueckMarine Spatial Ecology Lab and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, The University of Queensland, St Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Gabby N AhmadiaOceans Program, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Washington, D. C., United States of America.
Hugh P PossinghamSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Cynthia RiginosSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Eric A TremlSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Peter J MumbyMarine Spatial Ecology Lab and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, The University of Queensland, St Lucia Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Overfishing threatens the sustainability of coastal marine biodiversity, especially in tropical developing countries. To counter this problem, about 200 governments worldwide have committed to protecting 10%-20% of national coastal marine areas. However, associated impacts on fisheries productivity are unclear and could weaken the food security of hundreds of millions of people who depend on diverse and largely unregulated fishing activities. Here, we present a systematic theoretic analysis of the ability of reserves to rebuild fisheries under such complex conditions, and we identify maximum reserve coverages for biodiversity conservation that do not impair long-term fisheries productivity. Our analysis assumes that fishers have no viable alternative to fishing, such that total fishing effort remains constant (at best). We find that realistic reserve networks, which protect 10%-30% of fished habitats in 1-20 km wide reserves, should benefit the long-term productivity of almost any complex fishery. We discover a "rule of thumb" to safeguard against the long-term catch depletion of particular species: individual reserves should export 30% or more of locally produced larvae to adjacent fishing grounds. Specifically on coral reefs, where fishers tend to overexploit species whose dispersal distances as larvae exceed the home ranges of adults, decisions on the size of reserves needed to meet the 30% larval export rule are unlikely to compromise the protection of resident adults. Even achieving the modest Aichi Target 11 of 10% "effective protection" can then help rebuild depleted catch. However, strictly protecting 20%-30% of fished habitats is unlikely to diminish catch even if overfishing is not yet a problem while providing greater potential for biodiversity conservation and fishery rebuilding if overfishing is substantial. These findings are important because they suggest that doubling or tripling the only globally enforced marine reserve target will benefit biodiversity conservation and higher fisheries productivity where both are most urgently needed.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesFisheriesAnimalsBiodiversityFishesMarine Biology

Identifiers

PMID28056064
PMCPMC5215937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.