Can fisheries-induced evolution shift reference points for fisheries management?

Abstract

Heino, M., Baulier, L., Boukal, D. S., Ernande, B., Johnston, F. D., Mollet, F. M., Pardoe, H., Therkildsen, N. O., Uusi-Heikkilä, S., Vainikka, A., Arlinghaus, R., Dankel, D. J., Dunlop, E. S., Eikeset, A. M., Enberg, K., Engelhard G. H., Jørgensen, C., Laugen, A. T., Matsumura, S., Nusslé, S., Urbach, D., Whitlock, R., Rijnsdorp, A. D., and Dieckmann, U. 2013. Can fisheries-induced evolution shift reference points for fisheries management? – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 70: 707–721. Biological reference points are important tools for fisheries management. Reference points are not static, but may change when a population's environment or the population itself changes. Fisheries-induced evolution is one mechanism that can alter population characteristics, leading to “shifting” reference points by modifying the underlying biological processes or by changing the perception of a fishery system. The former causes changes in “true” reference points, whereas the latter is caused by changes in the yardsticks used to quantify a system's status. Unaccounted shifts of either kind imply that reference points gradually lose their intended meaning. This can lead to increased precaution, which is safe, but potentially costly. Shifts can also occur in more perilous directions, such that actual risks are greater than anticipated. Our qualitative analysis suggests that all commonly used reference points are susceptible to shifting through fisheries-induced evolution, including the limit and “precautionary” reference points for spawning-stock biomass, Blim and Bpa, and the target reference point for fishing mortality, F0.1. Our findings call for increased awareness of fisheries-induced changes and highlight the value of always basing reference points on adequately updated information, to capture all changes in the biological processes that drive fish population dynamics.

Economic repercussions of fisheries-induced evolution

“…Evolution tends to increase the ratio between SSB and total biomass (Fig. S4), which could mask a decreasing trend in total biomass and affect the stock-recruitment relationship (26); this may have important management implications when biomass levels approach SSB-based limit reference points (27,28). Even more worrisome is our finding that evolutionary effects tend to be more important when a fish stock is overexploited and the fishery is intermediately size-selective.…”

Size‐selective fishing and the potential for fisheries‐induced evolution in lake whitefish

“…Concern about fisheries‐induced evolution has pervaded discourse on fisheries management and poses important questions about whether (and how) fisheries‐induced evolution should be controlled or reversed (e.g., Dunlop et al., 2015; Heino et al., 2013). A frequent recommendation is to protect large fecund fish, which could be done, for example, by fishing using a gear type with bell‐shaped size selectivity (Hixon et al., 2014; Law, 2007).…”

Population Genomics of Marine Fishes: Next-Generation Prospects and Challenges

“…Consequently, evolutionary processes should ideally be incorporated into conservation and management practices to secure both the future evolutionary potential and sustainable exploitation of marine fishes (Hoffmann and Sgro, 2011;Heino et al, 2013). However, despite large quantities of phenotypic data, unequivocal evidence for recent genetic changes as a response to fishing pressure or temperature changes is still largely missing (Kuparinen and Merilä, 2007;Merilä and Hendry, 2014).…”