ArticleNature communications2025
The combined impact of fisheries and climate change on future carbon sequestration by oceanic macrofauna.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The combined impact of fisheries and climate change on future carbon sequestration by oceanic macrofauna.Nature communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although the role of marine macrofauna in the ocean carbon cycle is increasingly understood, the cumulative impacts of fisheries and climate change on this pathway remain overlooked. Here, using a marine ecosystem model, we estimate that each degree of warming reduces macrofauna biomass and carbon export by 4.2% and 2.46%, respectively. Under a high emission scenario (SSP 5-8.5), this translates to a 13.5% ± 6.6% decline in export by 2100, relative to the 1990s. Fishing further amplifies this reduction by up to 56.7% ± 16.3%, creating a sequestration deficit of 14.6 ± 10.3 GtC by 2100. On average, a 1% biomass loss from fishing results in a 0.8% decline in carbon export. However, sequestration durability (~600 years) remains unaffected. While measures restoring commercial macrofaunal biomass could yield carbon benefits comparable to mangrove restoration, multiple uncertainties limit their inclusion in the Nature-based Climate Solution portfolio, highlighting the need for further research.
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.