Abstract
The argument that sufficiently high fishing mortality (selective or not) can effect genetic change in fished populations has gained considerable traction since the late 1970s. The intervening decades have provided compelling experimental and model-based evidence that fisheries-induced evolution (FIE) can cause genetic changes in life history, behaviour and body shape, given sufficiently high trait heritability, selection intensity and time. Fisheries-induced evolution research has also identified or inferred negative implications to population recovery and sustainable yield, prompting calls for evolutionarily enlightened management to reduce the probability of FIE and mitigate its risks. Sufficient time has now elapsed to evaluate whether predicted negative consequences to recovery have been empirically realized. We find that many FIE-implicated populations have recovered rapidly to management-based targets following cessation of overfishing. We conclude that FIE is generally of minor importance to recovery when compared with overfishing, magnitude of depletion and natural mortality. By posing a series of questions and responses, we illustrate how science advice pertaining to human-induced evolution in fishes can be strengthened. We suggest that FIE research be refocused and its communication refined to: (a) better integrate FIE within existing stock-assessment modelling frameworks; (b) pose questions of greater relevance at the science:policy interface; and (c) concentrate research on questions pertaining to the subset of depleted populations for which the implications of FIE are likely to be magnified because of their synergistic interactions with other correlates of recovery and yield.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 453-464 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Fish and Fisheries |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Mar 1 2020 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:We are grateful to Stephanie Carlson and Michael Kinnison whose symposium on “Redefining Darwinian Fisheries” at the 147 Meeting of the American Fisheries Society provided the primary motivation for this work. We thank Erin Dunlop and two anonymous referees for thoughtful and constructive reviews of an earlier version of the manuscript. JAH is supported by a Discovery Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada and by a Killam Memorial Chair (Killam Trusts). AK is supported by funding from the Academy of Finland (grant no. 317495), an NSERC Discovery Grant and the European Research Council (COMPLEX‐FISH 770884). The present study reflects only the authors' views. The European Research Council is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information the study contains. th
Funding Information:
We are grateful to Stephanie Carlson and Michael Kinnison whose symposium on “Redefining Darwinian Fisheries” at the 147th Meeting of the American Fisheries Society provided the primary motivation for this work. We thank Erin Dunlop and two anonymous referees for thoughtful and constructive reviews of an earlier version of the manuscript. JAH is supported by a Discovery Grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada and by a Killam Memorial Chair (Killam Trusts). AK is supported by funding from the Academy of Finland (grant no. 317495), an NSERC Discovery Grant and the European Research Council (COMPLEX-FISH 770884). The present study reflects only the authors' views. The European Research Council is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information the study contains.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The Authors. Fish and Fisheries published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
ASJC Scopus Subject Areas
- Oceanography
- Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Aquatic Science
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
