Cited by 13Marine and fisheries researchFish Ecology and Management StudiesMathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models

Recruitment in tuna RFMO stock assessment and management: A review of current approaches and challenges

Kolody, Dale S., Eveson, J. Paige, Preece, Ann L., Davies, Campbell R., Hillary, Richard M.·2019·Fisheries Research

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fishres.2018.11.031

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kolody, D. S., Eveson, J. P., Preece, A. L., Davies, C. R., & Hillary, R. M.
Affiliations
CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere (AU)
Corresponding author
Kolody, Dale S.
Venue
Fisheries Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-09
Volume
217
Pages
217-234
ISSN
0165-7836 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2906650377
Cited by
13
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Fisheries Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Mathematical and Theoretical Epidemiology and Ecology Models
Keywords
regional fisheries management organizations, stock assessment, aerial survey, southern bluefin tuna, stock-recruitment relationship, penalized likelihood, ensemble learning, management strategy evaluation, recruitment uncertainty, tipping points

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.

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