The DOI matches its Crossref record; 99 of the 99 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 22 of the 79 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna
Open accessOverview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This study uses longline CPUE from 1958–2007 for six tuna species across the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Oceans to compare global habitat preferences with quotient analysis and Generalized Additive Models. It finds tropical tunas prefer warm, low-oxygen, stratified waters, while Atlantic and southern bluefin tunas prefer higher chlorophyll and tolerate the most extreme sea surface height anomalies and mixed layer depths.
Key findings
- Full GAMs explained 45% (bigeye) to 64% (skipjack) of null deviance; all final models retained TEMP5, salinity, SSH, MLD, and DCHL.
- Quotient analysis showed tropical tunas prefer warmer surface waters than temperate tunas: yellowfin preferred >25°C, while bigeye and skipjack preferred 20–28°C; albacore avoided waters below 14°C, and southern bluefin preference and Atlantic bluefin tolerance extended down to 4°C.
- Atlantic bluefin tolerated the widest range of environmental conditions, including the widest temperature tolerance range (approximately 1–20°C), high salinity above 37 PSU, and negative SSH anomalies; southern bluefin preferred mixed layer depths beyond approximately 300 m.
- Tropical tunas generally preferred lower oxygen environments than temperate tunas; yellowfin preferred relatively low oxygen waters (<0.2 mmol/l), bigeye tolerated them, and skipjack avoided waters below 0.1 mmol/l.
Methods
- Longline catch and effort data were obtained from the five TRFMOs for 1958–2007, except southern bluefin from 1965 and eastern Pacific stocks only until 2004; no skipjack longline data were available from WCPFC. Data were aggregated by quarter and 5°×5° resolution, and nominal CPUE was computed as catch per number of hooks, using only positive CPUE records.
- Environmental variables came from the PISCES biogeochemical model: surface temperature (TEMP5), temperature at 100 m (TEMP100), sea surface salinity, dissolved oxygen at 100 m, sea surface height, mixed layer depth, chlorophyll, and mesozooplankton averaged over 0–100 m.
- Habitat preferences were assessed with quotient analysis using 400 re-sampling iterations to test preference/tolerance/avoidance, and with GAMs assuming lognormal positive CPUE, spline functions with smoothness restricted to 4, fixed factors for year, season, and stock, and stepwise backward selection by AIC; TEMP100, oxygen, and zooplankton were excluded from full GAMs due to collinearity.
Limitations
- The paper states that CPUE may not accurately reflect population abundance due to changes in fishing practice, fleet efficiency, or environmental effects on catchability, although fixed factors were included and interpreting abundance trends was out of scope.
- The paper states that collinearity prevented inclusion of oxygen and other correlated variables in the final GAMs, and that predictions outside the observed range were unrealistic for some species, such as skipjack in the Mediterranean and at extreme latitudes.
- The paper states that longline data mostly catch adult tunas, so results mainly reflect adult habitat preferences; it also notes that spatio-temporally averaged chlorophyll may not capture frontal effects, prey field observations are generally lacking, and tagging studies are often local and short-term.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
54 Own result · 18 No full text of the sources · 18 No basis given · 9 Own interpretation · 8 Partly supported · 6 Supported · 6 Own method · 5 Not checked yet · 4 Supported so far · 1 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Sources not found · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Temperature and oxygen affect important biological processes and thus determine the spatial distribution of tunas (Barkley et al., 1978;Boyce et al., 2008;Brill, 1994;Strama et al., 2012).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Barkley et al., 1978
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Boyce et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction links physiological temperature tolerance to tuna range boundaries and identifies temperature as a strong predictor of distribution. It mentions oxygen content only as a factor hypothesized to correlate with abundance and distribution; it does not establish that oxygen affects biological processes and thereby determines tuna distribution. The cited claim states that relationship more definitively than this paper does. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Brill, 1994 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Salinity can influence large scale spatial distribution (e.g.Fromentin et al., 2014;Maury et al., 2001;Reygondeau et al., 2012).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Fromentin et al., 2014 source
Section 2.1 (Data) explicitly says salinity may influence the large-scale spatial distribution of tuna species. The claim’s “can influence” preserves that possibility rather than asserting a proven effect. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maury et al., 2001 source
- Supportedcites Reygondeau et al., 2012 source
The Environmental factors section identifies high salinity as a characteristic of two tuna-and-billfish ecoregions. The Discussion says regional environmental conditions affect the spatial distribution of these communities at a global scale. Together, these passages support the qualified claim that salinity can influence large-scale distribution; the paper does not isolate salinity’s effect from other environmental factors. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Habitat studies using fishery or survey data are often spatially limited and focused on single species (e.g.Chen et al., 2005;Sagarminaga and Arrizabalaga, 2010).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Chen et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes limitations in the spatial coverage of past fishery-oceanography studies, and this paper’s own habitat analysis focuses on one species, albacore. But it uses fishery and environmental data across the whole Indian Ocean, so Chen et al. is not itself an example of a spatially limited study. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sagarminaga and Arrizabalaga, 2010 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In fact, there are few studies where the habitat preferences of a group of species are analysed using similar datasets and methods at broad spatial scales (but see Reygondeau et al. 2012).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Reygondeau et al. 2012 source
The citation is offered as an example of an exception, not as evidence that such studies are few. The Introduction (page unavailable) says the paper applied one methodology to global fisheries data on tuna and billfish species to examine their distributions and environmental conditions. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In addition to the physical environment, the distribution of prey is also one of the main drivers of the spatial distribution and behaviour of tunas (Bertignac et al., 1998;Schick and Lutcavage, 2009, tunas, but data on tuna prey distribution and abundance is scarce and is mostly available from models (Lehodey et al., 1998).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bertignac et al., 1998 source
- Partly supportedcites Schick and Lutcavage, 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report a significant association between herring density and bluefin tuna presence, and the Discussion says prey distribution predicted bluefin presence better than SST fronts. The study covers a one-week snapshot in the Gulf of Maine; it does not establish prey distribution as a main driver of behaviour or of tuna distribution generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lehodey et al., 1998 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“our findings tend to confirm that Atlantic bluefin can also tolerate a wide range of biotic environments (in terms of plankton concentrations).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Fromentin et al., 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussion describe a wide *abiotic* niche for Atlantic bluefin tuna, based on temperature, salinity and depth. The Data section says chlorophyll concentration could not be included in the niche model, so our copy does not establish tolerance across a wide range of plankton concentrations. (LLM, conf=0.78)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“For example, temperature preferences provided in Boyce et al. (2008) are comparable to those provided in this study.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Boyce et al. (2008) source
The Database and Statistical analysis sections say Boyce et al. compiled and calculated temperature preferences for 18 tuna and billfish species. The Results section reports mean preferences, and Table 1 lists preferences. Whether those values are comparable to the citing authors’ results is the citing authors’ own assessment, not a finding attributed to Boyce et al. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“There have been several studies using alternative techniques, datasets and models, providing comprehensive descriptions of the habitat preferences of tunas in the past (see Boyce et al., 2008;Brill, 1994;Brill and Lutcavage, 2001;Sund et al., 1981).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Boyce et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and Database sections describe a study that compiled temperature preferences and tolerances for tuna and billfish species from 190 publications and used an empirical model to predict global richness patterns. This supports citing Boyce et al. as an example of a study using datasets and modelling to examine tuna preferences, but its focus is thermal preferences, not comprehensive habitat preferences more broadly. The supplied copy gives no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Brill, 1994 source
- Not matchedcites Brill and Lutcavage, 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“trophic resources must play a major role in the spatial distribution of tunas, as suggested by several relatively small scale studies (Bestley et al., 2009;Lezama et al., 2010;Schick and Lutcavage, 2009) and the fact that tunas conduct, as part of their life cycles, extensive trophic migrations to exploit seasonally productive areas (e.g.Dufour et al. 2010, Fonteneau et al., 2008).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bestley et al., 2009 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lezama et al., 2010 source
- Supportedcites Schick and Lutcavage, 2009 source
The Results report a significant relationship between bluefin tuna presence and herring density, with prey data improving the distribution model. The Discussion describes this as a one-week snapshot in the Gulf of Maine and cautions against assuming bluefin always occur at high herring densities. That limited finding fits the citing sentence’s use of the paper as one of several small-scale studies suggesting a role for trophic resources. (LLM, conf=0.90)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Results with respect to SSH were consistent with other finer scale studies suggesting Atlantic bluefin preference for negative SSH characteristic of mesoscale cyclonic eddies (Teo and Block, 2010)”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Teo and Block, 2010 source
The Discussion reports significantly higher Atlantic bluefin tuna catch per unit effort in Gulf of Mexico areas with negative sea surface height anomalies, which it identifies as characteristic of mesoscale cyclonic eddies. It also says bluefin catch tended to increase in areas with cyclonic eddies, supporting the citing sentence’s hedged description of a preference. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
- It may state two separate claims as one. 41
- Probably not a substantial claim. 16
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“PISCES has been extensively validated and has demonstrated the ability to realistically simulate seasonal, interannual and decadal physical and biogeochemical ocean variability.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 2.2. Environmental data
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Aumont and Bopp, 2006 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3.2 (Chlorophyll; page unavailable) reports that PISCES qualitatively reproduces observed chlorophyll patterns for May and November, supporting a limited claim about seasonal biogeochemical simulation. Section 3 (Model Mean State; page unavailable) explicitly says its comparisons are not an exhaustive validation. The paper does not establish realistic interannual or decadal physical and biogeochemical variability, so the broader claim overstates its evidence. (LLM, conf=0.88)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“GAMs have been previously used to study habitat preferences of many tuna species using fishery data (Lan et al., 2013;Maury et al., 2001;Mugo et al., 2010;Sagarminaga and Arrizabalaga 2010), larval survey data (Rooker et al., 2013) as well as electronic tagging data (Hazen et al., 2013).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 2.4. Generalized Additive Models
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Lan et al., 2013 source
Section 2.6 states that the authors used GAMs to predict potential yellowfin tuna habitat from fine-scale longline catches. Section 2.1.2 identifies those catches as fishery data. This supports the fishery-data portion of the sentence, to which Lan et al. (2013) is attached; the other data types have separate citations. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maury et al., 2001 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mugo et al., 2010 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Longlines resemble long baited transects and catch a wide range of species in a consistent way over a vast spatial scale and longline catch data have been previously used to analyse changes in abundance (Myers and Worm, 2003), diversity (Worm et al., 2005), range contraction (Worm and Tittensor, 2011) and biogeography (Reygondeau et al., 2012).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 2.1. Fishery data
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Myers and Worm, 2003 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Worm et al., 2005 source
- Supportedcites Worm and Tittensor, 2011 source
The Results (page unavailable) state that the authors used global Japanese longline catch data to assess changes in the observed ranges of tuna and billfish. They report significant range declines for nine of thirteen species, confirming the part of the citing sentence attached to Worm and Tittensor (2011). (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In fact, extensive longline datasets with broad spatio-temporal coverage have supported a number of studies in relation to tuna distribution and habitat preferences (e.g.Fromentin et al., 2014;Reygondeau et al., 2012;Worm and Tittensor, 2011).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Fromentin et al., 2014 source
Section 2.1 (Data) describes longline catch-and-effort observations spanning much of the Atlantic from 1960 to 2009, used alongside purse-seine data to model Atlantic bluefin tuna’s ecological niche. The Discussion (Section 4) says this spatially and temporally extensive catch dataset enabled the authors to examine the species’ niche, making the paper an example of the kind of study cited. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites Reygondeau et al., 2012 source
The Biological data section describes longline catch and effort data spanning 1953–2007 and a broad geographic area, used to determine tuna and billfish distributions. The Discussion says the study used that dataset to examine their biogeography and its relationship to environmental conditions. The copy does not provide page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Supportedcites Worm and Tittensor, 2011 source
The Results describe using a multidecadal database of global Japanese longline catches to map tuna and billfish occurrences and assess changes in their observed ranges. This paper therefore serves as an example of the cited group of studies using extensive longline data to investigate tuna distribution; the claim does not require each example to study habitat preferences as well. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Reygondeau et al. (2012) proposed a conceptual scheme where yellowfin, bigeye, albacore and bluefin species dominated different ecoregions as latitude increased.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Reygondeau et al. (2012) source
The “Tuna and billfish communities” section explicitly proposes a conceptual scheme based on the ecoregion predominating at each latitude. Figure 5 identifies yellowfin, bigeye, albacore and bluefin among the dominant species, while the ecoregion descriptions place them across tropical, gyre and temperate regions. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In the case of Atlantic bluefin, the model identifies the Mediterranean and the northern Atlantic (>40ºN) as most suitable, habitat suitability increasing further north beyond the northern range of the observations and decreasing towards the equator and southern hemisphere in spite of important catches that occurred in the past (Fromentin et al., 2014).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Fromentin et al., 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In the case of albacore, our quotient analysis results for temperature preference (up to and beyond 20ºC) are comparable to those of Hazen et al. (2013), while our GAM results suggest somewhat lower preferred values (around 15ºC), more in line with Boyce et al. (2008) and Lan et al. (2012).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hazen et al. (2013) source
- Partly supportedcites Boyce et al. (2008) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lan et al. (2012) source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Our predicted distributional ranges for albacore, bigeye and yellowfin were also comparable to those in Worm and Tittensor (2011), but were more extensive for both bluefin species and skipjack.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Worm and Tittensor (2011) source
The Results discuss observed ranges for albacore, bigeye, yellowfin, Atlantic and Pacific bluefin, and skipjack (Fig. 2 and Table 1). The statement that the citing authors’ predictions are comparable or more extensive is their own comparison, not a finding attributed to Worm and Tittensor. The source supplies the ranges used for that comparison. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the univariate GAMs, the”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Positive CPUE observations follow a lognormal error distribution.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The niche model is unimodal.
- Rests on an assumption: Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Scatterplots between environmental variables suggested high collinearity (R 2 >abs(0.6))between TEMP5 and TEMP100, TEMP5 and O2, and DCHL and ZOO (Figure 1).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 2.4. Generalized Additive Models
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They also generally included the three way stock:year:season interaction for fixed factors, except in the case of albacore where the interactions stock:year and stock:season were kept in the final model, and in the case of southern bluefin, with a single stock, where the year:season interaction was included.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Positive CPUE observations follow a lognormal error distribution.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The niche model is unimodal.
- Rests on an assumption: Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, relatively low DCHL and ZOO waters are preferred by tropical tunas and albacore, compared to both bluefin tunas, for which the preference and tolerance ranges are not very well defined, but results suggest that they can tolerate a wide range of DCHL and ZOO values.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Albacore avoids waters below 14ºC, which are preferred or tolerated by both Atlantic bluefin and southern bluefin.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Albacore preference and tolerance ranges extend to about 200 m, while southern bluefin tuna preference range extends to highly mixed waters with mixed layer depths of several hundred meters that Atlantic bluefin tuna tolerates.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SSH was the environmental variable that explained the highest percentage of deviance (22%) in the case of Atlantic bluefin, and between 28% and 5% for the rest of the species, except for albacore (<1%).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Positive CPUE observations follow a lognormal error distribution.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The niche model is unimodal.
- Rests on an assumption: Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Oxygen, highly correlated with temperature, explained similar proportions.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Positive CPUE observations follow a lognormal error distribution.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The niche model is unimodal.
- Rests on an assumption: Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“TEMP5 was the most important variable for yellowfin tuna, as TEMP100 was for southern bluefin.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Positive CPUE observations follow a lognormal error distribution.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The niche model is unimodal.
- Rests on an assumption: Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the temperate tunas, albacore showed a relatively narrow preference-tolerance range compared to southern bluefin that showed the largest oxygen preference values.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The percent deviance explained by the”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Positive CPUE observations follow a lognormal error distribution.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The niche model is unimodal.
- Rests on an assumption: Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yellowfin tuna preferred a wide range of relatively low oxygen waters (<0.2mmol/l) while bigeye tolerated them.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Skipjack tolerance range was more restricted and avoided waters below 0.1 mmol/l.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is remarkable that this analysis suggests that there is no well-established temperature preference, but the widest temperature tolerance range (approximately between 1ºC and 20ºC) for Atlantic bluefin tuna.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The preference range for southern bluefin and the tolerance range for Atlantic bluefin extend down to 4ºC (Figure 3, Figure S1).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the contrary, bluefin tunas showed preference and tolerance for negative SSH values, Atlantic bluefin preferring most negative values.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.1. Quotient analysis
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bigeye and yellowfin showed decreasing trends beyond 34 and 35 PSU respectively, but increasing trends were seen for skipjack.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Response curves for SSH suggested that positive SSH anomalies were preferred by southern bluefin, albacore and skipjack, and negative SSH anomalies were preferred by Atlantic bluefin, bigeye, yellowfin and also by skipjack.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Southern bluefin tuna preferred mixed layer depths beyond approximately 300 m, while Atlantic bluefin showed a clear preference for increasing mixed layer depths.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of southern bluefin, the models predicted suitable habitat also in the northern fringe (>40ºN) of the planet (where there are no observations of southern bluefin), but middle latitudes would act as a barrier to potential expansion from south to north.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fitted smooth curves show the preference for warm waters (between 20ºC and 30ºC) in the case of tropical tunas, for temperate waters (around 15ºC) in the case of albacore and Atlantic bluefin tuna, and for colder waters (< 10ºC) in the case of southern bluefin.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The predictions for the species with most extensive data coverage (albacore, yellowfin, bigeye) were reasonable, with poor habitat predictions out of the observed range (e.g.north of 50ºN and south of 50ºS).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Albacore preferred low DCHL waters, while southern bluefin, Atlantic bluefin and yellowfin showed an optimum at relatively high concentrations.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Salinity response curves showed a peak slightly above 35 PSU for southern bluefin, remained high above 36 PSU for Atlantic bluefin and showed an increasing trend beyond 36 PSU for albacore.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Albacore is a temperate to subtropical species with highest CPUEs between 20º-40º of each hemisphere.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Longline catch per unit effort (CPUE) is a valid proxy for tuna habitat preferences.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of skipjack, whose northernmost distribution is limited to around 40ºN, highest CPUEs are observed around 20º latitude in each hemisphere.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Longline catch per unit effort (CPUE) is a valid proxy for tuna habitat preferences.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“most tagging studies are local with short deployment periods (e.g.Cosgrove et al., 2014), and provide information about habitat characteristics only around deployment areas (Hobday and Evans, 2013).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Missing values were omitted before the stepwise selection, so that model comparisons were based on the same dataset.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 2.4. Generalized Additive Models
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A GAM enables fitting non-linear models for a wide family of statistical distributions, and thus is preferred to some other habitat modelling approaches (Guisan and Zimmermann, 2000).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 2.4. Generalized Additive Models
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hastie and Tibshirani, 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Guisan and Zimmermann, 2000 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the fishing methods, pelagic longlines show the largest spatio-temporal coverage, since they have operated for several decades across all oceans, targeting all main commercial tuna species except skipjack.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 2.1. Fishery data
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Some of these variables (e.g.temperature, DCHL) have been used in previous studies (e.g.Sagarminaga and Arrizabalaga 2010;Mugo et al., 2010), but description of the habitat preferences based on other variables (e.g.MLD, ZOO) is rarely found in the literature.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our habitat predictions are generally consistent with that view, although latitudinal ranges of suitable habitat for bigeye tuna were comparable to those of albacore.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
In the paper
“However, Hazen et al. (2013), using an extensive and detailed tagging dataset, estimated an optimum of around 20ºC for yellowfin, while our results of both the quotient analysis and the GAM suggest a preference for waters of up to 30ºC.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hazen et al. (2013) source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Fishery data have been criticised for inducing biased conclusions about stock abundance trends because CPUE series may not accurately reflect trends of population abundance due to changes in fishing practice, efficiency of the fleets or environmental effects on catchability, among others (see Maunder and Punt, 2004;Maunder et al., 2006;Polacheck, 2006).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Considering the differences in the nature of the data and the approach used, our results are generally consistent with several other studies.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In our case, we included fixed factors in the GAMs to accommodate changes in abundance and catchability.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The environmental variables in these areas are out of the ranges used in the skipjack model and thus the GAM predictions are unrealistic.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 3.2. Generalized additive models
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The 25%-75% interquartile range of the temperature preference profile in Cheung et al. (2013) is also consistent with our estimates, but in the case of temperate tunas the tolerance we estimated extended to colder waters.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Cheung et al. (2013) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“However, our habitat predictions showed a slightly higher latitudinal range compared to those predicted by coupled biophysical models in the case of skipjack in the Pacific Ocean (Bell et al., 2013;Lehodey et al., 2013), Indian Ocean (Dueri, 2012), and worldwide (Dueri, 2014), as well as in the case of Pacific bigeye tuna (Lehodey et al., 2010).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
In the paper
“The importance of DCHL was also suggested by Briand et al. (2011), using a detailed fishery dataset, for Pacific albacore.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Briand et al., 2011 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the meantime, fishery data remain a valuable source of information to analyse global habitat of tunas at broad spatial and temporal scales.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“trophodynamics of tunas are complex and dynamic (Young et al., 2014).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Young et al., 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the mechanisms through which salinity could affect tuna distribution remain unclear and could be a proxy of other underlying processes.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Maury et al. (2001) suggested that low salinities could indicate favourable trophic areas induced by fluvial water supplies.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maury et al., 2001 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No data on skipjack caught by longline was available from the Western and Central Pacific.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The importance of salinity for tuna distribution remains controversial in the literature, with some suggesting it is not important in influencing oceanic distribution (Sund et al., 1981), while others have found it to be influential (e.g.Bernal et al., 2009;Maury et al., 2001;Reygondeau et al., 2012).”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sund et al., 1981
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Bernal et al., 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Maury et al., 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our GAM results tend to support the importance of salinity since this variable showed variable response curves for all the species.”
§ Global habitat preferences of commercially valuable tuna > 4. Discussion
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
CPUE is a proxy for fish abundance.
“the CPUE was assumed to be a proxy for fish abundance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Tunas show a wide vertical distribution.
“For this study, and because tunas show a wide vertical distribution, we selected the following variables to characterise the surface and subsurface environment:”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Positive CPUE observations follow a lognormal error distribution.
“Positive CPUE observations were assumed to follow a lognormal error distribution and they were modelled as a function of the environmental variables, as well as fixed factors for”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The niche model is unimodal.
“The degree of smoothness of model terms was restricted to 4 in order to assume a unimodal niche model (sensu Hutchinson, 1957).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level.
“Changes in abundance and catchability are likely to occur at the stock level and so three way interactions among fixed factors were considered in the full GAMs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The response curves of the final GAMs can be interpreted as habitat suitability for the tuna species.
“The final GAMs were kept as those describing the habitat of the tuna species, and their response curves for environmental variables were interpreted in terms of habitat suitability (Figure 4).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Longline catch per unit effort (CPUE) is a valid proxy for tuna habitat preferences.
“our study reflects mostly habitat preferences for adult tunas (since it is based on longline data that mostly catches adult fish)”
The paper relies on this without support.
The quotient analysis's preference, tolerance and avoidance ranges validly indicate species-specific habitat preferences.
“Summary of quotient analyses, with species specific preference (green), tolerance (yellow) and avoidance (red) ranges for each environmental variable.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“It typically preys on small (2-5 cms) pelagic fishes, crustaceans and cephalopods (Magnuson, 1969;Roger, 1994;Druon et al., 2017), and performs migratory movements conditioned by SST and preys availability (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015;Druon et al., 2017).”
From African desert dust influences migrations and fisheries of the Atlantic skipjack-tuna (2023) · cites this paper as Arrizabalaga et al., 2015
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Skipjack tuna inhabits warm waters, preferably those with a sea surface temperature (SST) between 20 and 28 • C (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
From African desert dust influences migrations and fisheries of the Atlantic skipjack-tuna (2023) · cites this paper as Arrizabalaga et al., 2015
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R
Wood, S. N. (2017) · doi:10.1201/9781315370279 · Cited by 13,852
Brown, R. A., Hastie, T. J., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1991) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532174 · Cited by 8,263
Koyak, R. A., Hastie, T. J., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1991) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290538 · Cited by 7,717
Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology
Guisan, A., & Zimmermann, N. E. (2000) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/s0304-3800(00)00354-9 · Cited by 7,359
Hutchinson, G. E. (1957) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.1957.022.01.039 · Cited by 6,228
Orr, J. C., Fabry, V. J., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Doney, S. C., Feely, R. A., Gnanadesikan, A., Gruber, N., Ishida, A., Joos, F., et al. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04095 · Cited by 4,590
Self-citationHastie, T. J., & Tibshirani, R. J. (2014) · Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online · doi:10.1002/9781118445112.stat03141 · Cited by 3,156
Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities
Myers, R. A., & Worm, B. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01610 · Cited by 2,969
Chambers, J., & Hastie, T. (1991) · doi:10.2307/1269676 · Cited by 2,598
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Block, 2001, vol. 19
- FAO, 2011. Tuna and tuna-like species. In: Review of the State of World Marine Fishery Resources. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 569. Rome, pp. 227–243.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Climate change, tropical fisheries and prospects for sustainable development
Lam, V. W. Y., Allison, E. H., Bell, J. D., Blythe, J. L., Cheung, W. W. L., Frölicher, T. L., Gasalla, M. A., & Sumaila, U. R. (2020) · Nature Reviews Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43017-020-0071-9 · Cited by 344
Large-scale distribution of tuna species in a warming ocean
Erauskin‐Extramiana, M., Arrizabalaga, H., Hobday, A. J., Cabré, A., Ibaibarriaga, L., Arregui, I., Murua, H., & Chust, G. (2019) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.14630 · Cited by 176
“In general, regional and local studies have used a variety of approaches, with knowledge gaps for most of the large pelagic species, such as critical environmental conditions (Trenkel et al., 2014) making them difficult to compare in the absence of a common baseline (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationScales, K. L., Hazen, E. L., Jacox, M. G., Edwards, C. A., Boustany, A. M., Oliver, M. J., & Bograd, S. J. (2016) · Ecography · doi:10.1111/ecog.02272 · Cited by 130
“Temporally-averaged environmental data fields of coarse spatial resolution are often used to contextualise movement or sightings datasets for wide-ranging marine predators (e.g. Kaschner et al. 2006; Louzao et al. 2011; Mannocci et al. 2014; Arrizabalaga et al. 2015; Mannocci et al. 2015).”
BackgroundAtlantic Multidecadal Oscillations drive the basin-scale distribution of Atlantic bluefin tuna
Faillettaz, R., Beaugrand, G., Goberville, E., & Kirby, R. (2019) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aar6993 · Cited by 87
Habitat suitability of the Atlantic bluefin tuna by size class: An ecological niche approach
Druon, J., Fromentin, J., Hanke, A. R., Arrizabalaga, H., Damalas, D., Tičina, V., Quílez-Badia, G., Ramirez, K., Arregui, I., Tserpes, G., et al. (2016) · Progress In Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2016.01.002 · Cited by 89
“Positive and near null SSHa levels, which are mostly driven by high SSTs and linked with relatively low productive environments, effectively segregate worldwide the habitat of tropical from temperate tuna species (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015; Teo and Block, 2010).”
BackgroundSelf-citationModelling the oceanic habitats of two pelagic species using recreational fisheries data
Brodie, S. J., Hobday, A. J., Smith, J. A., Everett, J. D., Taylor, M. D., Gray, C. A., & Suthers, I. M. (2015) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12122 · Cited by 79
“The physiological limits of species are an important driver in their pelagic distributions, and thermal preferences have been identified using SDMs for tunas (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015), whale sharks © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Fish.”
BackgroundThe environmental niche of the global high seas pelagic longline fleet
Crespo, G. O., Dunn, D. C., Reygondeau, G., Boerder, K., Worm, B., Cheung, W. W. L., Tittensor, D. P., & Halpin, P. N. (2018) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat3681 · Cited by 79
Review of albacore tuna, Thunnus alalunga, biology, fisheries and management
Nikolic, N., Morandeau, G., Hoarau, L., West, W. M., Arrizabalaga, H., Hoyle, S., Nicol, S., Bourjea, J., Puech, A., Farley, J. H., et al. (2016) · Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries · doi:10.1007/s11160-016-9453-y · Cited by 73
“This is in agreement with Arrizabalaga et al. (2015) who found that albacore prefer larger oxygen values than tropical tunas (bigeye, yellowfin, skipjack (Katsuwonus pelamis)).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialSelf-citationChampion, C., Hobday, A. J., Tracey, S., & Pecl, G. T. (2018) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.14398 · Cited by 70
Hsu, T.-Y., Chang, Y., Lee, M.-A., Wu, R.-F., & Hsiao, S.-C. (2021) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs13050861 · Cited by 55
“2 PSU for the world oceans [16]; 5th and 95th percentile values ranged from 34.”
BackgroundDruon, J.-N., Chassot, E., Murua, H., & Lopez, J. (2017) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2017.00315 · Cited by 55
“SKJ habitat is associated with a sea surface temperature (SST) range between 18 and 30◦C (Barkley et al., 1978), with a preferred range between 23 and 28◦C (e.g., Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialEcological bridges and barriers in pelagic ecosystems
Briscoe, D. K., Hobday, A. J., Carlisle, A. B., Scales, K. L., Eveson, J. P., Arrizabalaga, H., Druon, J. N., & Fromentin, J. (2016) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2016.11.004 · Cited by 54
Self-citationLaconcha, U., Iriondo, M., Arrizabalaga, H., Manzano, C., Markaide, P., Montes, I., Zarraonaindia, I., Velado, I., Bilbao, E., Goñi, N., et al. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128247 · Cited by 56
Self-citationLucena‐Frédou, F., Kell, L. T., Frédou, T., Daniel Gaertner, C., Potier, M., Bach, P., Travassos, P., Hazin, F. H. V., & Ménard, F. (2016) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2016.10.008 · Cited by 48
Self-citationErauskin-Extramiana, M., Chust, G., Arrizabalaga, H., Cheung, W. W. L., Santiago, J., Merino, G., & Fernandes-Salvador, J. A. (2023) · Global and Planetary Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2023.104055 · Cited by 45
Self-citationImpacts of climate change on marine top predators: Advances and future challenges
Hobday, A. J., Arrizabalaga, H., Evans, K., Nicol, S., Young, J. W., & Weng, K. C. (2015) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2015.01.013 · Cited by 49
Self-citationLezama‐Ochoa, N., Murua, H., Chust, G., van Loon, E. E., Ruiz, J., Hall, M. A., Chavance, P., Molina, A., & Villarino, E. (2016) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2016.00034 · Cited by 45
“These environmental variables were selected by their general relevance for (epi) pelagic species and their relation to the specific oceanographic conditions in each Ocean (Sund et al., 1981; Martínez Rincón, 2012; Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
Self-citationGlobal patterns and inferences of tuna movements and trophodynamics from stable isotope analysis
Logan, J. M., Pethybridge, H., Lorrain, A., Somes, C. J., Allain, V., Bodin, N., Choy, C. A., Duffy, L., Goñi, N., Graham, B. S., et al. (2020) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2020.104775 · Cited by 38
Salazar, J. E., Benavides, I. F., Portilla-Cabrera, C. V., Alvis, Á. I. G., & Selvaraj, J. J. (2021) · Regional Studies in Marine Science · doi:10.1016/j.rsma.2021.101829 · Cited by 40
Liu, S., Tian, Y., Liu, Y., Alabia, I. D., Cheng, J., & Ito, S. (2022) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2022.105227 · Cited by 38
Arregui, I., Galuardi, B., Goñi, N., Lam, C. H., Fraile, I., Santiago, J., Lutcavage, M. E., & Arrizabalaga, H. (2018) · ICES Journal of Marine Science · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsy056 · Cited by 35
“However, warm-bodied bluefin tuna tolerate a wide range of environmental conditions (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015), which may explain this LOC pattern, despite lower ambient temperatures.”
BackgroundSelf-citationGuerranti, C., Cau, A., Renzi, M., et al. (2016) · Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part B · doi:10.1080/03601234.2016.1191886 · Cited by 34
Evidence and patterns of tuna spawning inside a large no-take Marine Protected Area
Hernández, C. M., Witting, J., Willis, C., Thorrold, S. R., Llopiz, J. K., & Rotjan, R. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-47161-0 · Cited by 34
Zhang, T., Song, L., Yuan, H., Song, B., & Ngando, N. E. (2021) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12539 · Cited by 33
Mondal, S., Vayghan, A. H., Lee, M., Wang, Y., & Semedi, B. (2021) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs13142669 · Cited by 34
“[63] reported that albacore favors relatively low chlorophyll levels (0.”
BackgroundXue, Y., Tanaka, K. R., Yu, H., Chen, Y., Guan, L., Li, Z., Yu, H., Xu, B., Ren, Y., & Wan, R. (2018) · Marine Biology Research · doi:10.1080/17451000.2018.1447673 · Cited by 30
“mation for predicting the effects of climate changes and support effective spatial and/or temporal based management strategies (Hsieh et al. 2010; Manderson et al. 2011; Arrizabalaga et al. 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialPhylotranscriptomic Insights into the Diversification of EndothermicThunnusTunas
Ciezarek, A., Osborne, O. G., Shipley, O. N., Brooks, E. J., Tracey, S., McAllister, J., Gardner, L. D., Sternberg, M. J. E., Block, B. A., & Savolainen, V. (2018) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msy198 · Cited by 29
“Electronic tagging has shown that the three bluefin tuna species are especiallycold-tolerant,feedingaslargeadultsinhighlatitudes insubpolarwaterswhereseatemperaturescanbeaslowas9 Catthesurfaceand0–2 (cid:2) Catdepth(Bestleyetal.2009;Block et al. 2011; Arrizabalaga et al. 2015; Wilson et al. 2015).”
BackgroundLiu, X., Wang, J., Zhang, Y., Yu, H., Xu, B., Zhang, C., Ren, Y., & Xue, Y. (2019) · Fisheries Research · doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2019.05.019 · Cited by 28
Vayghan, A. H., Lee, M., Weng, J., Mondal, S., Ching-Te, L., & Wang, Y. (2020) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs12162515 · Cited by 29
“Moreover, migration is triggered by food availability, which is mainly indicated by SSC and optimal SST [17,28,58,61].”
BackgroundAn ecosystem-driven model for spatial dynamics and stock assessment of North Atlantic albacore
Dragon, A., Senina, I. N., Titaud, O., Calmettes, B., Conchon, A., Arrizabalaga, H., & Lehodey, P. (2015) · Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2014-0338 · Cited by 30
Self-citationENSO drives near-surface oxygen and vertical habitat variability in the tropical Pacific
Leung, S. W., Thompson, L., McPhaden, M. J., & Mislan, K. A. S. (2019) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab1c13 · Cited by 32
“…and yellowfin tuna (Ingham et al 1977, Barkley et al 1978, Evans et al 1981, Gooding et al 1981, Bushnell et al 1990, Prince and Goodyear 2006, Arrizabalaga et al 2015), which make up the vast majority of tuna caught in the western and central tropical Pacific (Pons et al 2017) (see…”
BackgroundOrue, B., Pennino, M., López, J., Moreno, G., Santiago, J., Ramos, L., & Murua, H. (2020) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2020.00441 · Cited by 27
“, 1978) and a preferred range from 23 to 28C (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
BackgroundResultMunschy, C., Bodin, N., Potier, M., Héas-Moisan, K., Pollono, C., Degroote, M., West, W. M., Hollanda, S. J., Puech, A., Bourjea, J., et al. (2016) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2016.03.042 · Cited by 24
A fishing route optimization decision support system: The case of the tuna purse seiner
Granado, I., Hernando, L., Uriondo, Z., et al. (2023) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2023.07.009 · Cited by 26
Trueman, C. N., Artetxe-Arrate, I., Kerr, L. A., Meijers, A., Rooker, J. R., Sivankutty, R., Arrizabalaga, H., Belmonte, A., Deguara, S., Goñi, N., et al. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-41930-2 · Cited by 28
Self-citationEarlier migration and distribution changes of albacore in the Northeast Atlantic
Chust, G., Goikoetxea, N., Ibaibarriaga, L., Sagarmínaga, Y., Arregui, I., Fontán, A., Irigoien, X., & Arrizabalaga, H. (2019) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12427 · Cited by 26
Self-citationTidd, A. N., Brouwer, S. L., & Pilling, G. M. (2017) · Fish and Fisheries · doi:10.1111/faf.12207 · Cited by 25
Are shifts in species distribution triggered by climate change? A swordfish case study
Erauskin‐Extramiana, M., Arrizabalaga, H., Cabré, A., Coelho, R., Rosa, D., Ibaibarriaga, L., & Chust, G. (2019) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2019.104666 · Cited by 29
Self-citationAfrican desert dust influences migrations and fisheries of the Atlantic skipjack-tuna
Rodríguez, S., Riera, R., Fonteneau, A., Alonso-Pérez, S., & López-Darias, J. (2023) · Atmospheric Environment · doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2023.120022 · Cited by 23
“It typically preys on small (2 – 5 cms) pelagic fishes, crustaceans and cephalopods (Magnuson, 1969; Roger, 1994; Druon et al., 2017), and performs migratory movements conditioned by SST and preys availability (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015; Druon et al., 2017).”
Yang, S., Zhang, H., Fan, W., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.881036 · Cited by 22
“The salinity, SSH, chlorophyll-a, and primary production also have important effects on the spatial distribution of tuna (Briand et al., 2011; Arrizabalaga et al., 2015; Nataniel et al., 2021).”
BackgroundMachine-learning aiding sustainable Indian Ocean tuna purse seine fishery
Goikoetxea, N., Goienetxea, I., Fernandes, J. A., Goñi, N., Granado, I., Quincoces, I., Ibaibarriaga, L., Ruiz, J., Murua, H., & Caballero, A. (2024) · Ecological Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ecoinf.2024.102577 · Cited by 23
Self-citationWu, Y., Lan, K., Evans, K., Chang, Y., & Chan, J. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-17882-w · Cited by 24
When 1+1 can be >2: Uncertainties compound when simulating climate, fisheries and marine ecosystems
Evans, K., Brown, J. N., Gupta, A. S., Nicol, S., Hoyle, S., Matear, R. J., & Arrizabalaga, H. (2014) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2014.04.006 · Cited by 30
Self-citationTórres-Irineo, E., Salas, S., Euán-Ávila, J. I., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2021.643318 · Cited by 20
“The SST has been considered as a key variable regarding species distribution in marine ecosystems, while NPP refers to available carbon for consumption by the heterotrophic community and is estimated from a chlorophyll-based model (e.g., Arrizabalaga et al., 2015; Lezama-Ochoa et al., 2016).”
MethodZainuddin, M., Safruddin, S., Farhum, A., Budimawan, B., Hidayat, R., Selamat, M. B., Wiyono, E., Ridwan, M., Syamsuddin, M. L., & Ihsan, Y. N. (2023) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs15051268 · Cited by 22
Song, L., Li, T., Zhang, T., Sui, H., Li, B., & Zhang, M. (2023) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12643 · Cited by 23
Uranga, J., Arrizabalaga, H., Boyra, G., Hernandez, M. C., Goñi, N., Arregui, I., Fernandes, J. A., Yurramendi, Y., & Santiago, J. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0171382 · Cited by 21
Self-citationIdentifying optimal variables for machine-learning-based fish distribution modeling
Xu, S., Wang, J., Chen, X., & Zhu, J. (2024) · Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2023-0197 · Cited by 19
Global hotspots of shark interactions with industrial longline fisheries
Burns, E. S., Bradley, D., & Thomas, L. R. (2023) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.1062447 · Cited by 18
“Bigeye and yellowfin tuna catch is highest in the central oceans whereas albacore tuna catch is distributed across the southern oceans, consistent with each species' habitat preferences (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
BackgroundYang, S., Yu, L., Wang, F., Chen, T., Fei, Y., Zhang, S., & Fan, W. (2023) · Fishes · doi:10.3390/fishes8020078 · Cited by 20
Nataniel, A. N., López, J., & Soto, M. (2021) · Fisheries Research · doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2021.106073 · Cited by 21
Mammel, M., Naimullah, M., Vayghan, A. H., Hsu, J., Lee, M.-A., Wu, J.-H., Wang, Y.-C., & Lan, K.-W. (2022) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs14122932 · Cited by 17
Chang, Y., Hsu, J., Lai, P.-K., Lan, K., & Tsai, W. (2021) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2021.731950 · Cited by 24
Mondal, S., Lee, M.-A., Weng, J.-S., Osuka, K. E., Chen, Y.-K., & Ray, A. (2023) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.115733 · Cited by 16
“The SST is a key predictor of the relative frequency of any species in surface waters (Chen et al., 2005; Phillips et al., 2014; Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
BackgroundLin, H.-L., Wang, J., Zhu, J., & Chen, X. (2023) · ICES Journal of Marine Science · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsad163 · Cited by 17
Duncan, R., Brophy, D., & Arrizabalaga, H. (2018) · Fisheries Research · doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2017.12.011 · Cited by 19
Self-citationTidd, A. N., Blanchard, J. L., Kell, L. T., & Watson, R. A. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-28805-z · Cited by 20
Self-citationHabitat analysis of the commercial tuna of the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean
Hu, C., Harrison, D. P., Hinton, M. G., Siegrist, Z., & Kiefer, D. A. (2018) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12263 · Cited by 18
Environmental Factors Determine Tuna Fishing Vessels’ Behavior in Tonga
Vaihola, S., & Kininmonth, S. (2023) · Fishes · doi:10.3390/fishes8120602 · Cited by 18
Yati, E., Sadiyah, L., Satria, F., Alabia, I. D., Sulma, S., Prayogo, T., Marpaung, S., Harsa, H., Kushardono, D., Gaol, J. L., et al. (2024) · Marine Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.marenvres.2024.106540 · Cited by 25
Global knowledge domain and prospects in tuna research: A bibliometric analysis
Xie, J., Bian, Z., Wu, Q., Lin, T., Wu, F., & Lin, T. (2021) · Aquaculture and Fisheries · doi:10.1016/j.aaf.2021.09.005 · Cited by 22
Zhou, C., Wan, R., Cao, J., Xu, L., Wang, X., & Zhu, J. (2020) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12500 · Cited by 15
Continental‐scale hotspots of pelagic fish abundance inferred from commercial catch records
Bouchet, P. J., Meeuwig, J. J., Huang, Z. X., Letessier, T. B., Nichol, S., Caley, M. J., & Watson, R. A. (2017) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/geb.12619 · Cited by 15
“The trophodynamics and habitat usage of tunas, billfishes and their relatives are complex, dynamic and niche-dependent such that species occupying temperate or tropical eco-regions may exhibit contrasting tolerance for, and responses to, similar environmental signals (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
BackgroundDell’Apa, A., Boenish, R., Fujita, R. M., & Kleisner, K. M. (2023) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2023.1206911 · Cited by 18
Relano, V., & Pauly, D. F. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14095577 · Cited by 17
“Skipjack (Katsuwonus pelamis) Skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) can be found between 40◦ N and 40◦ S [31,32], being more abundant in tropical and subtropical waters of the Pacific [32], within 20◦ N of the equator [33].”
BackgroundEffect of oceanographic parameters on daily albacore catches in the Northeast Atlantic
Goñi, N., Didouan, C., Arrizabalaga, H., Chifflet, M., Arregui, I., Goikoetxea, N., & Santiago, J. (2015) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2015.01.012 · Cited by 14
Self-citationMichael, P. E., Wilcox, C., Tuck, G. N., Hobday, A. J., & Strutton, P. G. (2016) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2016.12.003 · Cited by 14
Marine megafauna niche coexistence and hotspot areas in a temperate ecosystem
Louzao, M., Valeiras, J., García‐Barcelona, S., et al. (2019) · Continental Shelf Research · doi:10.1016/j.csr.2019.07.013 · Cited by 14
Lopetegui-Eguren, L., Poos, J. J., Arrizabalaga, H., Guirhem, G. L., Murua, H., Lezama‐Ochoa, N., Griffiths, S. P., Gondra, J. R., Sabarros, P. S., Báez, J. C., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.863602 · Cited by 14
Self-citationHabitat modeling of mature albacore (Thunnus alalunga) tuna in the Indian Ocean
Mondal, S., & Lee, M. (2023) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2023.1258535 · Cited by 16
Dunn, N., & Curnick, D. J. (2019) · Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems · doi:10.1002/aqc.3204 · Cited by 13
“The importance of temperature as a determinant of tuna distribution has been shown in numerous studies (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015; Barkley, Neill, & Gooding, 1978; Brill & Lutcavage, 2001; Mugo et al., 2010; Zagaglia et al., 2004) and the range of water temperatures in this study is within the…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialOrue, B., López, J., Pennino, M., Moreno, G., Santiago, J., & Murua, H. (2020) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2020.104747 · Cited by 13
Zhang, T., Hu, G., Song, L., et al. (2024) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12701 · Cited by 12
Zhou, X., Chen, Z., Xiong, P., et al. (2022) · Fishes · doi:10.3390/fishes7050218 · Cited by 12
“For example, some studies showed that MLD had an important effect on tuna habitat distribution [57].”
ResultClimate Change Potential Impacts on the Tuna Fisheries in the Exclusive Economic Zones of Tonga
Vaihola, S., & Kininmonth, S. (2023) · Diversity · doi:10.3390/d15070844 · Cited by 14
Modelling fish physico-thermal habitat selection using functional regression
Boudreault, J., St‐Hilaire, A., Chebana, F., et al. (2021) · Journal of Ecohydraulics · doi:10.1080/24705357.2020.1840313 · Cited by 12
“…2003; Scheuerell et al. 2006; de Kerckhove et al. 2015; Neuswanger et al. 2015; Johnston et al. 2017; Montgomery et al. 2018) or to inform the regulation of commercial and recreational exploitation of fauna (e.g. Arrizabalaga et al. 2015; Li et al. 2015; Pennino et al. 2016; Wheaton et al. 2018).”
BackgroundPower, C., Carabott, M., Widdicombe, M., et al. (2023) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.15763 · Cited by 11
“thynnus, before returning to Australian waters (Arrizabalaga et al., 2015).”
Vaihola, S., Yemane, D. G., & Kininmonth, S. (2023) · Diversity · doi:10.3390/d15101091 · Cited by 16
“Alba-core, which is known to be temperate species, is also caught in Tongan waters and is known to have temperature preference range between 20 ◦ C and 30 ◦ C in each hemisphere [20].”
BackgroundInfluentialSeasonal productivity of the equatorial Atlantic shaped by distinct wind-driven processes
Brandt, P. N., Körner, M., Moum, J. N., Roch, M., Subramaniam, A., Czeschel, R., Krahmann, G., Dengler, M., & Kiko, R. (2025) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/s41561-024-01609-9 · Cited by 15
“Phytoplankton photosynthesis and organic matter production fuel productive marine ecosystems in the eastern equatorial Atlantic and Pacific 2,3 , supporting top predators such as economically important tropical tuna species 4,5 .”
Valls, M., Saber, S., Gómez, M. J., Reglero, P., & Mele, S. (2021) · Journal of Fish Biology · doi:10.1111/jfb.14935 · Cited by 10
The pelagic habitat analysis module for ecosystem‐based fisheries science and management
Harrison, D. P., Hinton, M. G., Kohin, S., et al. (2017) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12194 · Cited by 10
Martínez‐Rincón, R. O., & Acosta‐Pachón, T. A. (2022) · Progress In Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2022.102786 · Cited by 9
Michael, P. E., Tuck, G. N., Strutton, P. G., & Hobday, A. J. (2015) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12123 · Cited by 9
Todorović, S., Juan-Jordá, M. J., Arrizabalaga, H., & Murua, H. (2019) · Marine Policy · doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103700 · Cited by 9
Self-citationLiu, L., Wan, R., Wu, F., Wang, Y.-C., Zhu, Y., & Zhou, C. (2025) · ICES Journal of Marine Science · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsaf003 · Cited by 9
Mylona, D. (2021) · Anthropozoologica · doi:10.5252/anthropozoologica2021v56a2 · Cited by 12
Nataniel, A. N., Pennino, M. G., López, J., & Soto, M. (2021) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12568 · Cited by 13
Dumont, A., Sabarros, P. S., Sabarros, P. S., et al. (2024) · ICES Journal of Marine Science · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsae043 · Cited by 9
Dhurmeea, Z., Pethybridge, H., Langlais, C., Somes, C. J., Nikolic, N., Bourjea, J., Appadoo, C., & Bodin, N. (2020) · Deep Sea Research Part I Oceanographic Research Papers · doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2020.103286 · Cited by 9
Lopes, P. F. M., Andrade, L. C. A., Pennino, M. G., & Leite, T. (2021) · Fisheries Oceanography · doi:10.1111/fog.12534 · Cited by 9
Dupaix, A., Dagorn, L., Deneubourg, J., et al. (2024) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1002/eap.3018 · Cited by 8
Yang, S., Wang, L., Fei, Y., et al. (2024) · Regional Studies in Marine Science · doi:10.1016/j.rsma.2023.103366 · Cited by 8
Li, M., Yang, X.-M., Wang, Y., Wang, Y.-H., & Zhu, J.-F. (2024) · Journal of Marine Science and Engineering · doi:10.3390/jmse12061002 · Cited by 7
ROLE OF SUB SURFACE TEMPERATURE, SALINITY AND CHLOROPHYLL TO ALBACORE TUNA ABUNDANCE IN INDIAN OCEAN
Novianto, D., & Susilo, E. (2016) · Indonesian Fisheries Research Journal · doi:10.15578/ifrj.22.1.2016.17-26 · Cited by 8
International collaboration and comparative research on ocean top predators under CLIOTOP
Hobday, A. J., Arrizabalaga, H., Evans, K., Scales, K. L., Senina, I. N., & Weng, K. C. (2017) · Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography · doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2017.03.008 · Cited by 9
Self-citationMondal, S., Ray, A., Lee, M., & Boas, M. (2023) · Journal of Marine Science and Engineering · doi:10.3390/jmse11081565 · Cited by 7
Matsubara, N., Aoki, Y., Aoki, A., & Kiyofuji, H. (2024) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2024.1353918 · Cited by 9
Castrejón, M., Pittman, J. B., Ramírez-González, J., & Defeo, O. (2024) · Ocean & Coastal Management · doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107436 · Cited by 13
Rumpa, A., Najamuddin, N., Safruddin, S., et al. (2022) · Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity · doi:10.13057/biodiv/d230421 · Cited by 7
“…such as surface temperature, currents, salinity, and chlorophyll-a concentration based on remote sensing and geographic Information systems (Arrizabalaga et al. 2015; Ghufron et al. 2019; Seloi et al. 2019) and information based on local knowledge of fishermen (Moreno et al. 2007; Macusi…”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Arrizabalaga, H., Dufour, F., Kell, L., Merino, G., Ibaibarriaga, L., Chust, G., Irigoien, X., Santiago, J., Murua, H., Fraile, I., Chifflet, M., Goikoetxea, N., Sagarminaga, Y., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Herrera, M., Marc Fromentin, J., & Bonhomeau, S.
- Affiliations
- AZTI (ES)
- International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ES)
- Venue
- Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-03
- Volume
- 113
- Pages
- 102-112
- ISSN
- 0967-0645 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2037723922
- Semantic Scholar
- 8593a7cd0965d2a821fa75e8bbd894edf02396e7
- Cited by
- 194
- References
- 98
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8
- FWCI
- 7.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Deep Sea Research Part II Topical Studies in Oceanography (publishedVersion)
- HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) (submittedVersion)
- Institutional Archive of Ifremer (French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea) (submittedVersion)
- AZTI Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- King Abdullah University of Science and Technology Repository (King Abdullah University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- EU Marie Curie EST
- METAOCEANS (MEST-CT-2005–019678)
- European Commission (264933)
- EURO-BASIN: European Union Basin-scale Analysis, Synthesis and Integration
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Marine and fisheries research
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Fish Biology and Ecology Studies
- Keywords
- tuna, habitat preference, ecosystem approach to fisheries, Thunnus thynnus, southern bluefin tuna, albacore tuna, bigeye tuna, yellowfin tuna, skipjack tuna, chlorophyll, sea level anomalies, mixed layer depth, water column stratification, anoxic waters
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-16, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-16 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
