A toolbox to evaluate data reliability for whole-ecosystem models: Application on the Bay of Biscay continental shelf food-web model

Ecosystem models are always simplifications of reality and as such their application for ecosystem-based management requires standard validation. Here, the “DataReli” toolbox is proposed to evaluate the quality of the data used during the construction of ecosystem models, their coherence across trophic levels, and whether data limitations prevent the model long-term applications. This toolbox is the combination of three operational and complementary analyses: (i) the pedigree index to determine to what extent a model was calibrated on data of local origin; (ii) the graphical analysis known as PREBAL to assess whether a model respects some basic ecological and fisheries principles; and (iii) a sensitivity analysis to evaluate the robustness of model predictions to small variations in input data. The toolbox is delivered to potential users with main generic recommendations on how interpreting results conjointly and on which decisions to make about parameters’ revisions or model uses’ restrictions. (i) Corrections of parameters should be preferentially envisaged when modelling data-rich environments. (ii) For those models with an overall pedigree index above 0.4, a closer look at the pedigree routine, i.e. values by parameters and compartments, and the PREBAL analysis would help to prioritize parameters needing improvement. (ii)’ For Ecopath models of no overall acceptable quality (overall pedigree index <0.4), we recommend stopping the DataReli procedure at this point. (iii) In terms of sensitivity analysis, marked responses of model predictions to small variations in the input values must preferentially lead to restrictions in the model applications compared to corrections of parameter estimates. A concrete application of the “DataReli” toolbox to the pre-existing Ecopath model of the Bay of Biscay continental shelf food web is presented. For the present case study, the general level of input data reliability is considered as satisfying with regard to the model applications.

[1]  S. Metcalf.  Qualitative Models to Complement Quantitative Ecosystem Models for the Analysis of Data-Limited Marine Ecosystems and Fisheries , 2010 .

[2]  Edward J. Rykiel,et al.  Testing ecological models: the meaning of validation , 1996 .

[3]  S. Jennings,et al.  Weak cross‐species relationships between body size and trophic level belie powerful size‐based trophic structuring in fish communities , 2001 .

[4]  S. Rochettea,et al.  Dealing with uncertainty in qualitative models with a semi-quantitative approach based on simulations. Application to the Gironde estuarine food web (France) , 2008 .

[5]  Pierre Petitgas,et al.  Combining sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to evaluate the impact of management measures with ISIS–Fish: marine protected areas for the Bay of Biscay anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) fishery , 2010 .

[6]  Jeffrey M. Dambacher,et al.  RELEVANCE OF COMMUNITY STRUCTURE IN ASSESSING INDETERMINACY OF ECOLOGICAL PREDICTIONS , 2002 .

[7]  Jason S. Link,et al.  Adding rigor to ecological network models by evaluating a set of pre-balance diagnostics: A plea for PREBAL , 2010 .

[8]  Robert V. O'Neill,et al.  Robust Analysis of Aggregation Error , 1982 .

[9]  D. Pauly,et al.  Marine Mammal Impacts in Exploited Ecosystems: Would Large Scale Culling Benefit Fisheries? , 2012, PloS one.

[10]  D. Pauly,et al.  EcoTroph (ET): a trophic level based software for assessing the impacts of fishing on aquatic ecosystems. , 2009 .

[11]  E. Fulton,et al.  Effect of complexity on marine ecosystem models , 2003 .

[12]  André E. Punt,et al.  Which ecological indicators can robustly detect effects of fishing , 2005 .

[13]  Didier Gascuel,et al.  The trophic-level based model: A theoretical approach of fishing effects on marine ecosystems , 2005 .

[14]  John Turner,et al.  Model uncertainty in the ecosystem approach to fisheries , 2007 .

[15]  Jérémy Lobry,et al.  Dealing with uncertainty in qualitative models with a semi-quantitative approach based on simulations. Application to the Gironde estuarine food web (France) , 2009 .

[16]  R. H. Gardner,et al.  Parameter Uncertainty and Model Predictions: A Review of Monte Carlo Results , 1983 .

[17]  D. Pauly,et al.  Primary production required to sustain global fisheries , 1995, Nature.

[18]  R. Peters.  The Ecological Implications of Body Size , 1983 .

[19]  V. Trenkel,et al.  Combining quantitative and qualitative models to identify functional groups for monitoring changes in the Bay of Biscay continental shelf exploited foodweb , 2014 .

[20]  H. González,et al.  Carbon fluxes within the pelagic food web in the coastal area off Antofagasta (23°S), Chile : The significance of the microbial versus classical food webs , 2008 .

[21]  D. Baird,et al.  The effects of aggregation on the performance of the inverse method and indicators of network analysis , 2009 .

[22]  R. W. Sheldon,et al.  The Size Distribution of Particles in the OCEAN1 , 1972 .

[23]  Jason S. Link,et al.  Calculating ecological carrying capacity of shellfish aquaculture using mass-balance modeling: Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island , 2011 .

[24]  G. Pierce,et al.  An ecosystem approach for the assessment of fisheries impacts on marine top predators: the Bay of Biscay case study , 2012 .

[25]  Werner Ulrich,et al.  Consumer-resource body-size relationships in natural food webs. , 2006, Ecology.

[26]  H. Ducklow,et al.  Spatial and seasonal patterns of carbon cycling through planktonic food webs of the Arabian Sea determined by inverse analysis , 2006 .

[27]  D. Pauly.  On the interrelationships between natural mortality, growth parameters, and mean environmental temperature in 175 fish stocks , 1980 .

[28]  Villy Christensen,et al.  ECOPATH II − a software for balancing steady-state ecosystem models and calculating network characteristics , 1992 .

[29]  Raymond L. Lindeman.  The trophic-dynamic aspect of ecology , 1942 .

[30]  J. Polovina,et al.  Model of a coral reef ecosystem , 1984, Coral Reefs.

[31]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Ecopath, Ecosim, and Ecospace as tools for evaluating ecosystem impact of fisheries , 2000 .

[32]  S. Niiranen,et al.  Uncertainties in a Baltic Sea Food-Web Model Reveal Challenges for Future Projections , 2012, AMBIO.

[33]  Structure of the Body-Size Spectrum of the Biomass in Aquatic Ecosystems: A Consequence of Allometry in Predator–Prey Interactions , 1993 .

[34]  D. Pauly,et al.  A method for identifying keystone species in food web models , 2006 .

[35]  J. Link.  Translating ecosystem indicators into decision criteria , 2005 .

[36]  R. Christian,et al.  Uncertainty and the Use of Network Analysis for Ecosystem-Based Fishery Management , 2006 .

[37]  John H. Steele,et al.  A comparison of terrestrial and marine ecological systems , 1985, Nature.

[38]  J. Link,et al.  Food-web theory in marine ecosystems , 2005 .

[39]  Nathaniel K. Newlands,et al.  Automated parameter optimization for Ecopath ecosystem models , 2004 .

[40]  Charles J. Puccia,et al.  Qualitative Modeling of Complex Systems: An Introduction to Loop Analysis and Time Averaging , 1986 .

[41]  Julia L. Blanchard,et al.  Aggregation and removal of weak-links in food-web models: system stability and recovery from disturbance , 2005 .

[42]  H. Odum.  Efficiencies, Size of Organisms, and Community Structure , 1956 .

[43]  J. Lobry,et al.  Lower trophic levels and detrital biomass control the Bay of Biscay continental shelf food web: Implications for ecosystem management , 2011 .

[44]  V. Trenkel,et al.  Fishing fleet typology, economic dependence, and species landing profiles of the French fleets in the Bay of Biscay, 2000-2006 , 2009 .

[45]  D. Pauly,et al.  Trophodynamic indicators for an ecosystem approach to fisheries , 2005 .

[46]  S. Jennings,et al.  Abundance-body mass relationships in size-structured food webs , 2003 .

[47]  H. Browman,et al.  Perspectives on ecosystem-based approaches to the management of marine resources , 2004 .

[48]  T. Essington,et al.  Pitfalls and guidelines for “recycling” models for ecosystem-based fisheries management: evaluating model suitability for forage fish fisheries , 2014 .

[49]  Elizabeth A. Fulton,et al.  Approaches to end-to-end ecosystem models , 2010 .

[50]  Kelly Kearney,et al.  Amplification and attenuation of increased primary production in a marine food web , 2013 .

[51]  L. Morissette.  Complexity, cost and quality of ecosystem models and their impact on resilience : a comparative analysis, with emphasis on marine mammals and the Gulf of St. Lawrence , 2007 .

[52]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations , 2004 .

[53]  Anders Wikström,et al.  Biological ensemble modeling to evaluate potential futures of living marine resources. , 2013, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[54]  Jerome R. Ravetz,et al.  Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy , 1990 .

[55]  D. Oro,et al.  Significance of fisheries discards for a threatened Mediterranean seabird, the Balearic shearwater Puffinus mauretanicus , 2002 .