Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31824687›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2019

Assessing the recovery of an Antarctic predator from historical exploitation.

Alexandre N Zerbini, Grant Adams, John Best, Phillip J Clapham, Jennifer A Jackson, Andre E Punt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Changes in species composition of South Georgia seabirds and mammals 1985-2023: decrease in opportunities for local enhancement?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Alexandre N ZerbiniMarine Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115-6349, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9776-6605
Grant AdamsSchool of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, 1122 NE Boat Street, Seattle, WA 98105, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0297-8347
John BestQuantitative Ecology and Resource Management, University of Washington, 1503 NE Boat Street, Seattle, WA 98105, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8920-0900
Phillip J ClaphamSeastar Scientific, 27605 Hake Rd SW, Vashon, WA, 98070, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2776-5746
Jennifer A JacksonBritish Antarctic Survey, NERC, High Cross, Madingley Road, Cambridge, UK.
Andre E PuntSchool of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, 1122 NE Boat Street, Seattle, WA 98105, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recovery of whale populations from centuries of exploitation will have important management and ecological implications due to greater exposure to anthropogenic activities and increasing prey consumption. Here, a Bayesian population model integrates catch data, estimates of abundance, and information on genetics and biology to assess the recovery of western South Atlantic (WSA) humpback whales (

Indexed as

AntarcticAntarctic krillBayesian modellinghumpback whalespopulation assessmentSouth Atlantic Ocean

Identifiers

PMID31824687
PMCPMC6837233

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.