TY - JOUR
T1 - Making ecological indicators management ready:
T2 - Assessing the specificity, sensitivity, and threshold response of ecological indicators
AU - Fu, Caihong
AU - Xu, Yi
AU - Bundy, Alida
AU - Grüss, Arnaud
AU - Coll, Marta
AU - Heymans, Johanna J.
AU - Fulton, Elizabeth A.
AU - Shannon, Lynne
AU - Halouani, Ghassen
AU - Velez, Laure
AU - Akoglu, Ekin
AU - Lynam, Christopher P.
AU - Shin, Yunne-jai
N1 - © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
PY - 2019/10
Y1 - 2019/10
N2 - Moving toward ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) necessitates a suite of ecological indicators that are responsive to fishing pressure, capable of tracking changes in the state of marine ecosystems, and related to management objectives. In this study, we employed the gradient forest method to assess the performance of 14 key ecological indicators in terms of specificity, sensitivity and the detection of thresholds for EBFM across ten marine ecosystems using four modelling frameworks (Ecopath with Ecosim, OSMOSE, Atlantis, and a multi-species size-spectrum model). Across seven of the ten ecosystems, high specificity to fishing pressure was found for most of the 14 indicators. The indicators biomass to fisheries catch ratio (B/C), mean lifespan and trophic level of fish community were found to have wide utility for evaluating fishing impacts. The biomass indicators, which have been identified as Essential Ocean Variables by the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), had lower performance for evaluating fishing impacts, yet they were most sensitive to changes in primary productivity. The indicator B/C was most sensitive to low levels of fishing pressure with a generally consistent threshold response around 0.4*FMSY (fishing mortality rate at maximum sustainable yield) across nine of the ten ecosystems. Over 50% of the 14 indicators had threshold responses at, or below ∼0.6* FMSY for most ecosystems, indicating that these ecosystems would have already crossed a threshold for most indicators when fished at FMSY. This research provides useful insights on the performance of indicators, which contribute to facilitating the worldwide move toward EBFM.
AB - Moving toward ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) necessitates a suite of ecological indicators that are responsive to fishing pressure, capable of tracking changes in the state of marine ecosystems, and related to management objectives. In this study, we employed the gradient forest method to assess the performance of 14 key ecological indicators in terms of specificity, sensitivity and the detection of thresholds for EBFM across ten marine ecosystems using four modelling frameworks (Ecopath with Ecosim, OSMOSE, Atlantis, and a multi-species size-spectrum model). Across seven of the ten ecosystems, high specificity to fishing pressure was found for most of the 14 indicators. The indicators biomass to fisheries catch ratio (B/C), mean lifespan and trophic level of fish community were found to have wide utility for evaluating fishing impacts. The biomass indicators, which have been identified as Essential Ocean Variables by the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), had lower performance for evaluating fishing impacts, yet they were most sensitive to changes in primary productivity. The indicator B/C was most sensitive to low levels of fishing pressure with a generally consistent threshold response around 0.4*FMSY (fishing mortality rate at maximum sustainable yield) across nine of the ten ecosystems. Over 50% of the 14 indicators had threshold responses at, or below ∼0.6* FMSY for most ecosystems, indicating that these ecosystems would have already crossed a threshold for most indicators when fished at FMSY. This research provides useful insights on the performance of indicators, which contribute to facilitating the worldwide move toward EBFM.
KW - Ecological modelling
KW - Fishing pressure
KW - Gradient forest method
KW - Indicator performance
KW - Marine ecosystem
KW - Primary productivity
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.05.055
DO - 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.05.055
M3 - Article
SN - 1470-160X
VL - 105
SP - 16
EP - 28
JO - Ecological Indicators
JF - Ecological Indicators
ER -