确定近海风能开发对商业渔业物种影响(或不影响)的证据基础有限

IF 5.6 1区 农林科学 Q1 FISHERIES
Andrew B. Gill, Julie Bremner, Karen Vanstaen, Sylvia Blake, Frances Mynott, Susana Lincoln
{"title":"确定近海风能开发对商业渔业物种影响(或不影响)的证据基础有限","authors":"Andrew B. Gill,&nbsp;Julie Bremner,&nbsp;Karen Vanstaen,&nbsp;Sylvia Blake,&nbsp;Frances Mynott,&nbsp;Susana Lincoln","doi":"10.1111/faf.12871","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The coexistence between offshore wind and fisheries has raised questions about potential impacts on species that are fished. We systematically evaluated the offshore wind farm (OWF) literature for evidence of effects leading to impacts on commercial fisheries species. First, we collated evidence of environmental effects of OWFs on fisheries species and then determined whether these could be interpreted as impacts using fishery-scale and organism-scale parameters for pelagic finfish, demersal and reef-associated roundfish, demersal flatfish, elasmobranchs and shellfish. We appraised consistency and level of agreement of direct evidence and explored the body of indirect evidence. A total of 1268 documents featured evidence of OWF effects on fisheries species, with only 60 documents (274 species records) providing direct evidence. Evidence on finfish far outweighed that for shellfish. Demersal and reef-associated roundfish were the best-studied group, while elasmobranchs were poorly evidenced. Most studies considered population rather than stock parameters. There was limited evidence of impacts, owing to inconclusive results and inconsistent effects within the parameters assessed—illustrating the importance of looking across the evidence base rather than focussing on individual studies. Hence, there is currently insufficient direct evidence to confidently determine OWF impacts on fisheries species. Overwhelmingly, the evidence deals with indirect effects, although these should not be disregarded as they can highlight plausible impacts on fisheries species, which could guide research and monitoring targeted at understanding the impacts of OWF—a pressing concern given the increased policy commitment of many nations to these two marine sectors sharing marine space.</p>","PeriodicalId":169,"journal":{"name":"Fish and Fisheries","volume":"26 1","pages":"155-170"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faf.12871","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Limited Evidence Base for Determining Impacts (Or Not) of Offshore Wind Energy Developments on Commercial Fisheries Species\",\"authors\":\"Andrew B. Gill,&nbsp;Julie Bremner,&nbsp;Karen Vanstaen,&nbsp;Sylvia Blake,&nbsp;Frances Mynott,&nbsp;Susana Lincoln\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/faf.12871\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The coexistence between offshore wind and fisheries has raised questions about potential impacts on species that are fished. We systematically evaluated the offshore wind farm (OWF) literature for evidence of effects leading to impacts on commercial fisheries species. First, we collated evidence of environmental effects of OWFs on fisheries species and then determined whether these could be interpreted as impacts using fishery-scale and organism-scale parameters for pelagic finfish, demersal and reef-associated roundfish, demersal flatfish, elasmobranchs and shellfish. We appraised consistency and level of agreement of direct evidence and explored the body of indirect evidence. A total of 1268 documents featured evidence of OWF effects on fisheries species, with only 60 documents (274 species records) providing direct evidence. Evidence on finfish far outweighed that for shellfish. Demersal and reef-associated roundfish were the best-studied group, while elasmobranchs were poorly evidenced. Most studies considered population rather than stock parameters. There was limited evidence of impacts, owing to inconclusive results and inconsistent effects within the parameters assessed—illustrating the importance of looking across the evidence base rather than focussing on individual studies. Hence, there is currently insufficient direct evidence to confidently determine OWF impacts on fisheries species. Overwhelmingly, the evidence deals with indirect effects, although these should not be disregarded as they can highlight plausible impacts on fisheries species, which could guide research and monitoring targeted at understanding the impacts of OWF—a pressing concern given the increased policy commitment of many nations to these two marine sectors sharing marine space.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fish and Fisheries\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"155-170\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faf.12871\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fish and Fisheries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12871\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FISHERIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fish and Fisheries","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12871","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近海风电与渔业的共存引发了对渔业物种潜在影响的质疑。我们系统地评估了海上风电场(OWF)文献,以寻找对商业渔业物种产生影响的证据。首先,我们整理了有关海上风电场对渔业物种环境影响的证据,然后使用渔业尺度和生物尺度参数确定这些证据是否可解释为对中上层鳍鱼类、底栖和与珊瑚礁相关的圆鳍鱼类、底栖比目鱼类、鞘鳃亚纲鱼类和贝类的影响。我们评估了直接证据的一致性和一致程度,并探讨了间接证据。共有1268份文件提供了OWF对渔业物种影响的证据,其中只有60份文件(274种记录)提供了直接证据。有关有鳍鱼类的证据远远多于有关贝类的证据。底层鱼类和与珊瑚礁相关的圆鳍鱼是研究得最好的鱼类,而箭鱼的证据则很少。大多数研究考虑的是种群数量而不是种群参数。关于影响的证据有限,原因是没有得出结论,而且所评估参数的影响不一致--这说明了纵观整个证据库而不是专注于个别研究的重要性。因此,目前还没有足够的直接证据来可靠地确定 OWF 对渔业物种的影响。绝大多数证据都涉及间接影响,尽管这些证据不应被忽视,因为它们可以突出对渔业物种的合理影响,这可以指导旨在了解 OWF 影响的研究和监测--鉴于许多国家对这两个海洋部门共享海洋空间的政策承诺日益增加,这是一个紧迫的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Limited Evidence Base for Determining Impacts (Or Not) of Offshore Wind Energy Developments on Commercial Fisheries Species

The coexistence between offshore wind and fisheries has raised questions about potential impacts on species that are fished. We systematically evaluated the offshore wind farm (OWF) literature for evidence of effects leading to impacts on commercial fisheries species. First, we collated evidence of environmental effects of OWFs on fisheries species and then determined whether these could be interpreted as impacts using fishery-scale and organism-scale parameters for pelagic finfish, demersal and reef-associated roundfish, demersal flatfish, elasmobranchs and shellfish. We appraised consistency and level of agreement of direct evidence and explored the body of indirect evidence. A total of 1268 documents featured evidence of OWF effects on fisheries species, with only 60 documents (274 species records) providing direct evidence. Evidence on finfish far outweighed that for shellfish. Demersal and reef-associated roundfish were the best-studied group, while elasmobranchs were poorly evidenced. Most studies considered population rather than stock parameters. There was limited evidence of impacts, owing to inconclusive results and inconsistent effects within the parameters assessed—illustrating the importance of looking across the evidence base rather than focussing on individual studies. Hence, there is currently insufficient direct evidence to confidently determine OWF impacts on fisheries species. Overwhelmingly, the evidence deals with indirect effects, although these should not be disregarded as they can highlight plausible impacts on fisheries species, which could guide research and monitoring targeted at understanding the impacts of OWF—a pressing concern given the increased policy commitment of many nations to these two marine sectors sharing marine space.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Fish and Fisheries
Fish and Fisheries 农林科学-渔业
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
6.00%
发文量
83
期刊介绍: Fish and Fisheries adopts a broad, interdisciplinary approach to the subject of fish biology and fisheries. It draws contributions in the form of major synoptic papers and syntheses or meta-analyses that lay out new approaches, re-examine existing findings, methods or theory, and discuss papers and commentaries from diverse areas. Focal areas include fish palaeontology, molecular biology and ecology, genetics, biochemistry, physiology, ecology, behaviour, evolutionary studies, conservation, assessment, population dynamics, mathematical modelling, ecosystem analysis and the social, economic and policy aspects of fisheries where they are grounded in a scientific approach. A paper in Fish and Fisheries must draw upon all key elements of the existing literature on a topic, normally have a broad geographic and/or taxonomic scope, and provide general points which make it compelling to a wide range of readers whatever their geographical location. So, in short, we aim to publish articles that make syntheses of old or synoptic, long-term or spatially widespread data, introduce or consolidate fresh concepts or theory, or, in the Ghoti section, briefly justify preliminary, new synoptic ideas. Please note that authors of submissions not meeting this mandate will be directed to the appropriate primary literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信