Role of Upwelling on Larval Dispersal and Productivity of Gooseneck Barnacle Populations in the Cantabrian Sea: Management Implications
Authors:
Antonella Rivera,
Nicolas Weidberg,
Antonio F. Pardiñas,
Ricardo Gonzalez-Gil,
Lucıa Garcıa- Florez,
Jose Luis Acuña
Abstract:
The effect of coastal upwelling on the recruitment and connectivity of coastal marine populations has rarely been characterized to a level of detail to be included into sound fishery management strategies. The gooseneck barnacle (Pollicipes pollicipes) fishery at the Cantabrian Coast (Northern Spain) is located at the fringes of the NW Spanish Upwelling system. This fishery is being co-managed thr…
▽ More
The effect of coastal upwelling on the recruitment and connectivity of coastal marine populations has rarely been characterized to a level of detail to be included into sound fishery management strategies. The gooseneck barnacle (Pollicipes pollicipes) fishery at the Cantabrian Coast (Northern Spain) is located at the fringes of the NW Spanish Upwelling system. This fishery is being co-managed through a fine-scale, interspersed set of protected rocks where each rock receives a distinct level of protection. Such interspersion is potentially beneficial, but the extent to which such spacing is consistent with mean larval dispersal distances is as yet unknown. We have simulated the spread of gooseneck barnacle larvae in the Central Cantabrian Coast using a high-resolution time-series of current profiles measured at a nearshore location. During a year of high upwelling activity (2009), theoretical recruitment success was 94% with peak recruitment predicted 56 km west of the emission point. However, for a year of low upwelling activity (2011) theoretical recruitment success dropped to 15.4% and peak recruitment was expected 13 km east of the emission point. This is consistent with a positive correlation between catch rates and the Integrated Upwelling Index, using a 4-year lag to allow recruits to reach commercial size. Furthermore, a net long-term westward larval transport was estimated by means of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) sequences for five populations in the Cantabrian Sea. Our results call into question the role of long distance dispersal, driven by the mesoscale processes in the area, in gooseneck barnacle populations and point to the prevalent role of small-scale, asymmetric connectivity more consistent with the typical scale of the co-management process in this fishery.
△ Less
Submitted 17 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
How is model-related uncertainty quantified and reported in different disciplines?
Authors:
Emily G. Simmonds,
Kwaku Peprah Adjei,
Christoffer Wold Andersen,
Janne Cathrin Hetle Aspheim,
Claudia Battistin,
Nicola Bulso,
Hannah Christensen,
Benjamin Cretois,
Ryan Cubero,
Ivan A. Davidovich,
Lisa Dickel,
Benjamin Dunn,
Etienne Dunn-Sigouin,
Karin Dyrstad,
Sigurd Einum,
Donata Giglio,
Haakon Gjerlow,
Amelie Godefroidt,
Ricardo Gonzalez-Gil,
Soledad Gonzalo Cogno,
Fabian Grosse,
Paul Halloran,
Mari F. Jensen,
John James Kennedy,
Peter Egge Langsaether
, et al. (18 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
How do we know how much we know? Quantifying uncertainty associated with our modelling work is the only way we can answer how much we know about any phenomenon. With quantitative science now highly influential in the public sphere and the results from models translating into action, we must support our conclusions with sufficient rigour to produce useful, reproducible results. Incomplete considera…
▽ More
How do we know how much we know? Quantifying uncertainty associated with our modelling work is the only way we can answer how much we know about any phenomenon. With quantitative science now highly influential in the public sphere and the results from models translating into action, we must support our conclusions with sufficient rigour to produce useful, reproducible results. Incomplete consideration of model-based uncertainties can lead to false conclusions with real world impacts. Despite these potentially damaging consequences, uncertainty consideration is incomplete both within and across scientific fields. We take a unique interdisciplinary approach and conduct a systematic audit of model-related uncertainty quantification from seven scientific fields, spanning the biological, physical, and social sciences. Our results show no single field is achieving complete consideration of model uncertainties, but together we can fill the gaps. We propose opportunities to improve the quantification of uncertainty through use of a source framework for uncertainty consideration, model type specific guidelines, improved presentation, and shared best practice. We also identify shared outstanding challenges (uncertainty in input data, balancing trade-offs, error propagation, and defining how much uncertainty is required). Finally, we make nine concrete recommendations for current practice (following good practice guidelines and an uncertainty checklist, presenting uncertainty numerically, and propagating model-related uncertainty into conclusions), future research priorities (uncertainty in input data, quantifying uncertainty in complex models, and the importance of missing uncertainty in different contexts), and general research standards across the sciences (transparency about study limitations and dedicated uncertainty sections of manuscripts).
△ Less
Submitted 1 July, 2022; v1 submitted 24 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
