SynthesisPloS one2021
A systematic review of spatial habitat associations and modeling of marine fish distribution: A guide to predictors, methods, and knowledge gaps.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Thermal Vulnerability of Reef Fish and Implications for Subsistence Fisheries Throughout the Caribbean.Global change biology · 2026Article
- Environmental Responses and Interspecific Associations of Fish Communities in the Zhoushan Fishing Ground Revealed by HMSC.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- A Crusade Throughout the World's Oceans: Genetic Evidence of the Southern Bluefin TunaBiology · 2025Article
- Mapping the potential for offshore aquaculture of salmonids in the Yellow Sea.Marine life science & technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As species distribution models, and similar techniques, have emerged in marine ecology, a vast array of predictor variables have been created and diverse methodologies have been applied. Marine fish are vital food resources worldwide, yet identifying the most suitable methodology and predictors to characterize spatial habitat associations, and the subsequent distributions, often remains ambiguous. Our objectives were to identify knowledge gaps in fish guilds, identify research themes, and to determine how data sources, statistics, and predictor variables differ among fish guilds. Data were obtained from an international literature search of peer-reviewed articles (2007-2018; n = 225) and research themes were determined based on abstracts. We tested for differences in data sources and modeling techniques using multinomial regressions and used a linear discriminant analysis to distinguish differences in predictors among fish guilds. Our results show predictive studies increased over time, but studies of forage fish, sharks, coral reef fish, and other fish guilds remain sparse. Research themes emphasized habitat suitability and distribution shifts, but also addressed abundance, occurrence, stock assessment, and biomass. Methodologies differed by fish guilds based on data limitations and research theme. The most frequent predictors overall were depth and temperature, but most fish guilds were distinguished by their own set of predictors that focused on their specific life history and ecology. A one-size-fits-all approach is not suitable for predicting marine fish distributions. However, given the paucity of studies for some fish guilds, researchers would benefit from utilizing predictors and methods derived from more commonly studied fish when similar habitat requirements are expected. Overall, the findings provide a guide for determining predictor variables to test and identifies novel opportunities to apply non-spatial knowledge and mechanisms to models.
Indexed as
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.