Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70257685

Computational approaches improve evidence synthesis and inform broad fisheries trends

Abstract

Addressing ecological impacts with effective conservation actions requires information on the links between human pressures and localized responses. Understanding links is a priority for many conservation contexts, including the world's fresh waters, which face intensifying threats to disproportionately high species diversity, including more than half of the world's fish species. Literature synthesis can uncover links and highlight potential research gaps, yet can be very cumbersome and time consuming. Emerging tools like text mining can improve efficiency in extracting relevant information from vast scientific outputs. This study synthesizes evidence of direct anthropogenic threats to major inland fisheries and examines driver-impact-response patterns using coupled automated and manual text classification methods. We screened 9336 abstracts from 45 river basins of high importance to inland fish production; 1152 abstracts contained evidence of direct threats to fish. The most common documented drivers were pollution, dams, and fishing pressure, which were most strongly linked to decreased fitness, altered reproduction, and mortality, respectively. Strong impact-response links to pollution signal potential bias toward documenting acute threats that generate more visible and immediate impacts. The use of machine learning-based text classification performed best in classifying extraneous information. Results can inform the development of inland fisheries indicators and threat-based metrics, highlight possible evidence gaps in linking global drivers to fishery-level responses, and illustrate the application of a coupled synthesis approach for improved efficiency and extraction of information relevant to conservation outcomes. The associated user and interpretation guides address accessibility and technical barriers faced by conservation scientists to improve efficiency in evidence synthesis.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gretchen L. Stokes, Abigail J. Lynch, John V. Flores, Jesse P. Wong, Connor Morang, Chelsie Romulo, Simon Funge-Smith, John Valbo-Jorgensen, Samuel J. Smidt. 2024-07-26. Computational approaches improve evidence synthesis and inform broad fisheries trends. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13167

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Successes and opportunities for solutions-oriented conservation research: Lessons learned from avian science

Conservation science struggles with an ongoing divide between research and action. Given its history of broad public engagement and multi-scale management coordination, avian conservation typifies many of the challenges, successes, and opportunities across the broader field of conservation and is rich with examples that may guide solutions-oriented conservation science. In semi-structured focus groups composed of bird conservation scientists and practitioners from various backgrounds, we discussed the definition, characteristics, and examples of solutions-oriented conservation science. Our discussions highlighted several examples where successful application of avian conservation science led to change in programs, policy, regulations, and social systems, including several with co-benefits for local communities. These successes were characterized by communication, collaboration, and co-development with local communities, decision-makers, practitioners, and Indigenous communities. We identified remaining opportunities for improvement, including aligning incentives and priorities between research and practice, working across disciplines to mobilize solutions, dismantling barriers to inclusion, and emphasizing the importance of relationship-building in conservation science. We outline suggestions that researchers can use to incorporate these lessons from solutions-oriented avian conservation science into training and mentoring programs.

Conservation Science and Practice

Connecting and coordinating conservation action across landscapes through regional planning processes and syntheses

Modern threats to conservation are often global; however, relevant conservation decisions and actions typically occur within local jurisdictions. The socio-ecological complexity of these problems requires collaboration across large landscapes, diverse community interests, and geopolitical boundaries, yet a lack of interoperability of planning products among decision makers, jurisdictions, and objectives impedes collaboration. Here, we provide a working model for the collaborative, iterative development of a landscape conservation design (LCD) in the Midwest region of the United States, the Midwest Conservation Blueprint, and demonstrate its applicability to the coordination of voluntary conservation actions and investments across jurisdictional boundaries. We used spatial prioritization software to synthesize over 20 datasets to develop a basemap of priority lands and waters for conservation across a diverse set of societal and ecological values (e.g., water quality, biodiversity, recreation). The Midwest Conservation Blueprint is a living plan, updated annually based on improvements in underlying data, understanding of local conditions, and public input. Landscape-scale planning is not designed to replace local knowledge or supersede decision-making authorities. However, by synthesizing existing data that represent diverse socio-ecological values and planning at a broader scale, the Midwest Conservation Blueprint documents where there are shared priorities and opportunities for collaborative landscape conservation.

Midwest

Debunking the myth of the quintessential resource manager: Precision in actionable science

“Actionable science” is a widely held standard for identifying the merits of natural resources research. Yet, science is often framed as actionable to a vaguely identified quintessential “manager” without defining either the intended manager or use. Generic descriptions lack precision for identifying end users or their needs, limiting methodological rigor in research design and leading to contextual misalignments of outputs with the need they intended to serve. Further, imprecise terminology limits the ability to evaluate impact, replicate efforts, or foster adoption and implementation of findings. This perspective article presents the heuristic of “who, what, when, where, why, how” to help researchers be more precise when describing their actionable science. Through intentional reflection, researchers can move beyond generic framings of “managers” representing monolithic organizations. “Managers” become individuals, with unique responsibilities, functions, worldviews, and levels of authority, all influencing their use of and need for scientific information and data.

Conservation Science and Practice