ArticleScience advances2020
Ocean planning for species on the move provides substantial benefits and requires few trade-offs.
Article in Science advances, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shifts and expansion in a spatially structured fish stock spanning international borders in the Northwest Atlantic.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026Article
- Ocean Planning and Conservation in the Age of Climate Change: A Roundtable Discussion.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Article
- Climate change exacerbates nutrient disparities from seafood.Nature climate change · 2023Article
- Timing and magnitude of climate-driven range shifts in transboundary fish stocks challenge their management.Global change biology · 2022Article
- Systematic prioritization protocol applied to wolverine habitat connectivity.STAR protocols · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Societies increasingly use multisector ocean planning as a tool to mitigate conflicts over space in the sea, but such plans can be highly sensitive to species redistribution driven by climate change or other factors. A key uncertainty is whether planning ahead for future species redistributions imposes high opportunity costs and sharp trade-offs against current ocean plans. Here, we use more than 10,000 projections for marine animals around North America to test the impact of climate-driven species redistributions on the ability of ocean plans to meet their goals. We show that planning for redistributions can substantially reduce exposure to risks from climate change with little additional area set aside and with few trade-offs against current ocean plan effectiveness. Networks of management areas are a key strategy. While climate change will severely disrupt many human activities, we find a strong benefit to proactively planning for long-term ocean change.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.