Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32047241›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Long-term observations from Antarctica demonstrate that mismatched scales of fisheries management and predator-prey interaction lead to erroneous conclusions about precaution.

George M Watters, Jefferson T Hinke, Christian S Reiss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Adjusting the management of the Antarctic krill fishery to meet the challenges of the 21st century.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  3. Mapping encounters between Antarctic krill fishing vessels and air-breathing krill predators using acoustic data from the fishery.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Conservation in the Scotia Sea in light of expiring regulations and disrupted negotiations.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors.

George M WattersAntarctic Ecosystem Research Division, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, La Jolla, California, 92037, USA. George.Watters@noaa.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6989-1273
Jefferson T HinkeAntarctic Ecosystem Research Division, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, La Jolla, California, 92037, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3600-1414
Christian S ReissAntarctic Ecosystem Research Division, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, La Jolla, California, 92037, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low catch limits for forage species are often considered to be precautionary measures that can help conserve marine predators. Difficulties measuring the impacts of fisheries removals on dependent predators maintain this perspective, but consideration of the spatio-temporal scales over which forage species, their predators, and fisheries interact can aid assessment of whether low catch limits are as precautionary as presumed. Antarctic krill are targeted by the largest fishery in the Southern Ocean and are key forage for numerous predators. Current krill removals are considered precautionary and have not been previously observed to affect krill-dependent predators, like penguins. Using a hierarchical model and 30+ years of monitoring data, we show that expected penguin performance was reduced when local harvest rates of krill were ≥0.1, and this effect was similar in magnitude to that of poor environmental conditions. With continued climate warming and high local harvest rates, future observations of penguin performance are predicted to be below the long-term mean with a probability of 0.77. Catch limits that are considered precautionary for forage species simply because the limit is a small proportion of the species' standing biomass may not be precautionary for their predators.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemAnimalsAntarctic RegionsBiomassEnvironmental MonitoringFeeding BehaviorFisheriesPopulation DensityPredatory BehaviorSpheniscidae

Identifiers

PMID32047241
PMCPMC7012885

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.