# Fishes in a changing world: learning from the past to promote sustainability of fish populations

T. A. C. Gordon, H. R. Harding, F. K. Clever, I. K. Davidson, W. Davison, D. W. Montgomery, R. C. Weatherhead, F. M. Windsor, J. D. Armstrong, Agnes Bardonnet, et al.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

T. A. C. Gordon, H. R. Harding, F. K. Clever, I. K. Davidson, W. Davison, et al.. Fishes in a changing world: learning from the past to promote sustainability of fish populations. Journal of Fish Biology, 2018, 92 (3), pp.804-827. 10.1111/jfb.13546. hal-01753931

HAL Id: hal-01753931

https://hal.science/hal-01753931

Submitted on 29 Mar 2018

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
*Journal of Fish Biology* (2018) **92**, 804–827

doi:10.1111/jfb.13546, available online at wileyonlinelibrary.com

Fishes in a changing world: learning from the past to
promote sustainability of fish populations

T. A. C. GORDON*#, H. R. HARDING†‡#, F. K. CLEVER§, I. K. DAVIDSON*, W. DAVISON*, D. W. MONTGOMERY*, R. C. WEATHERHEAD||, F. M. WINDSOR¶, J. D. ARMSTRONG**, A. BARDONNET††, E. BERGMAN‡‡, J. R. BRITTON§§, I. M. CÔTÉ|||, D. D'AGOSTINO¶¶, L. A. GREENBERG‡‡, A. R. HARBORNE***, K. K. KAHILAINEN†††, N. B. METCALFE‡‡‡, S. C. MILLS§§§|||], N. J. MILNER¶¶¶, F. H. MITTERMAYER****, L. MONTORIO††††, S. L. NEDELEC*, J. M. PROKKOLA‡‡‡‡, L. A. RUTTERFORD*, A. G. V. SALVANES§§§§, S. D. SIMPSON*, A. VAINIKKA‡‡‡‡, J. K. PINNEGAR||||| AND E. M. SANTOS*

*Biosciences, University of Exeter, Geoffrey Pope Building, Stocker Road, Exeter, EX4 4QD, U.K., †School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1TQ, U.K., §School of Science and the Environment, John Dalton Building, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester Street, M1 5GD, Manchester, U.K., ||Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, Penglais, SY23 3DA, U.K., ¶School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF10 3AX, U.K., **Marine Scotland Science, Freshwater Fisheries Laboratory, Faskally, Pitlochry, PH16 5LB, U.K., ††ECOBIOP, UMR 1224, INRA, Univ. Pau & Pays Adour, Saint-Pée sur Nivelle, 64310, France, ‡‡Department of Environmental and Life Sciences, Karlstad University, S-651 88, Karlstad, Sweden, §§Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, BH12 5BB, Poole, U.K., ||||Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada, ¶¶School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, U.K., ***Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, North Miami, Florida, 33181, U.S.A., ††††Faculty of Biosciences, Fisheries and Economics, The Norwegian College of Fishery Science, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037, Tromsø, Norway, ‡‡‡‡Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, MVLS, University of Glasgow, University Avenue, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, U.K., §§§§CRIOBE USR 3278 EPHE-CNRS-UPVD PSL, BP, 1013 Moorea, 98729, French Polynesia, |||||Laboratoire d'Excellence "CORAIL", France, ¶¶¶|APEM Ltd, School of Biological Sciences, Bangor, LL57 2UW, Wales, U.K., ****Evolutionary Ecology of Marine Fishes, GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research, Düsternbrooker Weg 20, 24105, Kiel, Germany, †††††ESE, Ecology and Ecosystem Health, Agrocampus Ouest, INRA, 35042, Rennes, France, ‡‡‡‡‡Department of Environmental and Biological Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, PO Box 111, FI-80101, Joensuu, Finland, §§§§§Department of Biological Sciences, University of Bergen, PO Box 7803, 5020, Bergen, Norway and |||||Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft Laboratory, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, NR33 0HT, U.K.

‡Author Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: +44 117 394 1212; email: harry.harding@bristol.ac.uk

#These authors contributed equally to this work.
Populations of fishes provide valuable services for billions of people, but face diverse and interacting threats that jeopardize their sustainability. Human population growth and intensifying resource use for food, water, energy and goods are compromising fish populations through a variety of mechanisms, including overfishing, habitat degradation and declines in water quality. The important challenges raised by these issues have been recognized and have led to considerable advances over past decades in managing and mitigating threats to fishes worldwide. In this review, we identify the major threats faced by fish populations alongside recent advances that are helping to address these issues. There are very significant efforts worldwide directed towards ensuring a sustainable future for the world's fishes and fisheries and those who rely on them. Although considerable challenges remain, by drawing attention to successful mitigation of threats to fish and fisheries we hope to provide the encouragement and direction that will allow these challenges to be overcome in the future.

© 2018 The Authors. *Journal of Fish Biology* published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Fisheries Society of the British Isles.

Key words: challenges; fish; fisheries; future; global change; sustainability.

## INTRODUCTION

Fish populations are of immense global value, shaping ecosystem services for billions of people worldwide (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999; Worm *et al.*, 2006; Cooke *et al.*, 2016). However, our planet is currently facing unprecedented environmental and societal changes that are having dramatic effects on fish and fisheries (Arthington *et al.*, 2016; Waters *et al.*, 2016). Understanding the probable scope of these changes is crucial in allowing us to develop mitigation strategies, manage fish populations, and minimize negative effects for those who rely on them. Moreover, the pivotal position of fishes in aquatic ecosystems renders them important indicators of environmental health (Graham *et al.*, 2015; Lynch *et al.*, 2016). Effective assessment and proactive management at the ecosystem level has the potential to considerably improve the resilience of aquatic ecosystems to global change, preventing potentially disastrous declines in fish populations (McCaulley *et al.*, 2015; Scheffer *et al.*, 2015). The success of such management relies on the ability to identify current and future threats to fishes and using past successes to develop effective tools for future mitigation strategies.

This paper was envisioned during the 50th Anniversary Symposium of The Fisheries Society of the British Isles at the University of Exeter, U.K., in July 2017, by a team of 30 biologists who were challenged to consider the greatest threats fish populations are facing and how we might ensure sustainability in the future. The authors discussed ideas focused on what threats fishes face today, what can be learnt from previous successes, and how to best address future challenges. This paper was written as a collaborative endeavour, summarizing the outcomes of both this conference and relevant recent literature. We hope that it provides a useful review of current threats, an encouraging summary of recently-developed innovations and management options, and a forward-looking roadmap detailing future challenges facing fish populations worldwide and potential avenues for effective management and sustainability.

## ISSUES FACING FISHES TODAY

Fishes in marine, transitional and freshwater habitats face a multitude of threats ultimately driven by increasing human populations (projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050; United Nations, 2017) and intensifying resource use including for food provision
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>FIG. 1. Hierarchical structure of threats facing fishes globally. Human population growth as a driver leads to altered resource use and subsequently to fitness consequences and population declines by a wide range of varied and inter-linking mechanisms.</figcaption></figure>

(fishing, irrigation, agriculture, livestock production), energy production (hydropower, wind turbines, oil and gas drilling, fracking, biomass harvesting), water usage (drinking, sanitation, industry) and other goods (mining, forestry, river channelling). The accumulation of threats has resulted in unprecedented effects on ecosystems, with widespread population declines of fauna and extinctions across many taxa (Foley et al., 2011; Mueller et al., 2012; Young et al., 2016; Ceballos et al., 2017). These threats are manifested through multiple biological, chemical, physical and climatic mechanisms (Fig. 1). Threats occur across a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, and need to be understood in the context of a combination of local (spatially and temporally variable) and global (large scale, with little spatial and temporal variation) pressures. A combination of local and global mitigation strategies will therefore be required to restore and sustain the health of aquatic systems.

Physical threats to aquatic systems include habitat degradation, fragmentation or destruction (Valiela et al., 2001; Waycott et al., 2009) and flow modification (e.g. water or sand extraction for societal use), caused by developments of energy infrastructure (e.g. dams for hydropower) and changes in land use (Dudgeon et al., 2006; Ziv et al., 2012; Pittock et al., 2015). Overexploitation of fish stocks beyond sustainable limits is one of the most severe threats to fish populations (Pauly et al., 1998; Allan et al., 2005; Pauly & Zeller, 2016), with direct effects ranging from mortality through to fishing-induced life-history changes on populations (Jørgensen et al., 2007; Kuparinen & Festa-Bianchet, 2017). Aquaculture of fish and other organisms may relieve pressure on natural fish stocks, but also has the potential to cause damage through proliferation of pathogens, destruction of natural habitat, localized pollution and distortion of native gene pools through escapes of strains selected for performance in captive conditions (Naylor et al., 2000; Tornero & Hanke, 2016). Water pollution is another major threat, acting via a diverse array of mechanisms. Chemicals from industrial and domestic wastewater discharges and run-off from urban areas, agriculture and aquaculture can persist in aquatic environments and have a wide range of biological consequences for organisms and populations, ranging from lethal effects to non-lethal physiological
changes such as disruption of the endocrine system (Jobling *et al.*, 1998; Jones & de Voogt, 1999; Hamilton *et al.*, 2016). Additionally, agricultural and aquacultural run-off can cause eutrophication of aquatic systems leading to local reductions in oxygen concentrations, which may be further exacerbated by climatic changes (Smith *et al.*, 1999; Jenny *et al.*, 2016). Expansion of severely hypoxic water masses ($<0.5 \text{ ml l}^{-1} \text{ O}_2$) compresses habitable areas for fishes and causes concerning lethal and sub-lethal effects (Diaz & Rosenberg, 2008; Gallo & Levin, 2016; Townhill *et al.*, 2017). Further, human disruption of river continuity (for example for hydroelectricity production or water supply), coupled with stocking of migratory fishes, can cause shortages in nutrient availability (Nislow *et al.*, 2004). Stressors such as anthropogenic noise (e.g. commercial shipping, recreational motorboats) can affect both the physiology and behaviour of fish and have direct effects on fitness (Slabbekoorn *et al.*, 2010; Simpson *et al.*, 2016). Biological threats, including non-native species and aquaculture, have also emerged as significant pressures on biodiversity in aquatic environments and can have profound ecological consequences both directly (e.g. predation) and indirectly (e.g. habitat alterations, pathogens) (Middlelemas *et al.*, 2013; Gallardo *et al.*, 2015). All of these human-induced biological changes may persist over time through a range of genetic and epigenetic mechanisms (Feil & Fraga, 2012; Paris *et al.*, 2015; Uusi-Heikkilä *et al.*, 2017).

Threats that are temporally persistent and geographically extensive will have the most widespread effects on ecosystems. For instance, rising atmospheric CO₂ levels and associated acidification, together with warming and expansion of hypoxic zones in aquatic environments, have a range of individual, population, community and ecosystem-level effects on fishes globally (Perry *et al.*, 2005; Deutsch *et al.*, 2011; Stramma *et al.*, 2012; Jenny *et al.*, 2016). Associated reductions in pH and carbonate levels cause physiological and behavioural changes that may have severe consequences for both marine and freshwater populations (Simpson *et al.*, 2011b; Munday *et al.*, 2012; Stiasny *et al.*, 2016; Tix *et al.*, 2017). Some organisms can adapt behaviourally, physiologically or morphologically, whereas others are more intolerant and may be more susceptible to threats (Gallo & Levin, 2016). Mobile marine fishes may be more resilient to changes in temperature due to their potential for poleward range shifts (Simpson *et al.*, 2011a; Fossheim *et al.*, 2015), whilst non-diadromous freshwater fishes are more likely to be constrained by enclosed ecosystems, making such compensatory range shifts less feasible (Strayer & Dudgeon, 2010; Rolls *et al.*, 2017). Climate change-related effects on hydrological regimes and increased frequency and intensity of droughts and floods can dramatically affect riverine fish distributions and abundance (Milly *et al.*, 2005; Arthington *et al.*, 2010; Reynard *et al.*, 2017). Additionally, increasing mismatches between seasonal temperature patterns and photoperiodic cues can have population and ecosystem-wide effects in high latitude areas where daylight length changes with seasons (Jørgensen & Johnsen, 2014; Stevenson *et al.*, 2015).

The threats faced by fishes are rarely, if ever, experienced in isolation (Halpern *et al.*, 2008). Threats to aquatic ecosystems can occur concurrently or consecutively within the lifetime of a fish, with resulting antagonistic, additive or synergistic effects which may significantly alter the consequences of the individual stressors (Crain *et al.*, 2008; Darling & Côté, 2008). The consequences of such exposures to multiple stressors are often highly complex and context dependent. For example, coral-reef habitats and the fishes that occupy them are simultaneously threatened by both local overfishing and pollution as well as changes to global ocean pH and temperatures (Hughes *et al.*, 2017).
Additionally, temperature changes and hypoxia can act synergistically, such that small shifts in one stressor result in large effects on organismal performance when fish are exposed to both in combination (McBryan *et al.*, 2013). In contrast, a stressor can also act to reduce the effects of other stressors when acting in combination or its effects may be dependent on life stage. For example, hypoxia was shown to protect fishes from cop- per toxicity during embryonic development, but this effect was reversed after hatching (Fitzgerald *et al.*, 2016, 2017). In freshwater lakes, climate-change induced increases in temperature and precipitation influence both eutrophication and deep-water hypoxia, altering habitat availability for many fish species (Graham & Harrod, 2009; Rolls *et al.*, 2017). The increasing frequency of droughts can have a synergistic effect with other anthropogenic stressors; e.g. by increasing the concentration of chemical pollutants in fresh waters (Woodward *et al.*, 2010). Additionally, symbiotic interactions further complicate the consequences of ecosystem threats, as sub-lethal effects on one species can affect sublethally another species with which it interacts (Mills & Reynolds, 2004; Beldade *et al.*, 2017). Such interactions introduce considerable complexity to the anal- ysis of the issues that fishes face, increasing the difficulty to predict levels of threat, causal relationships and likely consequences for survival.

## LEARNING FROM PREVIOUS SUCCESSES

In confronting the significant challenges faced by fishes in globally changing ecosystems, it is important to reflect on the significant progress that has been made in addressing such issues over past decades. Revolutionary new conceptual, experimen- tal, computational and technological advances have dramatically changed approaches in aquatic ecology, facilitating the development of strategies for dealing with future challenges. For example, modern genetics and genomics methods have revealed the fine-scale genetic diversity within and among fish populations, advanced modelling tools have allowed incorporating multiple individual-level processes in simulation models used to address realistic large-scale management scenarios, and technological developments in survey equipment have enhanced our ability to study and conserve deep-water ecosystems and species of particular concern (Dunlop *et al.*, 2009; Favaro *et al.*, 2011; Beguer-Pon *et al.*, 2015; Fernandes *et al.*, 2016; Valenzuela-Quiñonez, 2016). The following examples are not intended to be comprehensive, but provide case studies of how increases in understanding or new technologies have improved the management of fish populations.

## CHEMICAL POLLUTION

Advances in ecotoxicology have demonstrated that even very small concentrations of pharmaceutical and industrial chemicals can have extensive consequences for fish populations through sub-lethal effects (Hamilton *et al.*, 2016). For example, synthetic oestrogens present in waste waters can result in widespread endocrine disruption in wild fish, with potentially negative implications for populations (Jobling *et al.*, 1998, 2006; Kidd *et al.*, 2007). Further, lessons from large oil spills (e.g. M.V. Exxon Valdez in 1989; M.V. Deepwater Horizon in 2010) have revealed variability across life-stages in the response of fishes to pollutants, in the time scales associated with stock recovery, the time lags associated with secondary effects such as disease and malnutrition, and
the interactions of oil pollutants with natural environmental conditions (Pearson *et al.*, 1999; Thorne & Thomas, 2008; Whitehead, 2013; Incardona *et al.*, 2014). Additionally, recent experimental findings show that hydrocarbon-based pollutants at environmentally-relevant concentrations disrupt behaviours that are crucial to larval survival and settlement in coral-reef fishes (Johansen *et al.*, 2017). These recent developments in our understanding of the consequences of exposure to pollutants enhance our ability to predict and mitigate the effects of such events in the future. This ability has important implications for governmental decision-making, *e.g.* regarding waste water treatments, oil exploration, drilling and construction near sensitive ecosystems. Indeed, several examples of ecosystem recovery have been reported following introduction of improved treatment of wastewaters and reduction of discharges [*e.g.* the River Aire (Sheahan *et al.*, 2002) and the Mersey estuary (Jones, 2006) in the U.K.], effectively demonstrating the benefits of improved wastewater management strategies.

## CLIMATE CHANGE

Growing concerns surrounding the consequences of anthropogenic climate change have resulted in a dramatic increase in related research. For example, a recent wealth of predictive models has been developed to help determine future patterns of fish distribution and productivity, with increasing competitive abilities and physiological challenges (Cheung *et al.*, 2010, 2013; Piou *et al.*, 2015). Furthermore, despite the problem of ocean acidification having only been recognized within the past decade or so, there is now significant progress towards understanding the effects of temperature and changing ocean pH, both as individual stressors and in the context of a complex suite of other environmental pressures (Orr *et al.*, 2005; Kroeker *et al.*, 2017). Additionally, our understanding of the ability of fish in riverine systems to shift their spatial distributions with changing isotherms has increased (Comte & Grenouillet, 2013). Previously, research had centred upon spatial predictions and exposure; recent progress now facilitates detailed analysis of vulnerability frameworks (including species-specific sensitivities, adaptive capacity and exposure) to aid in the conservation and management of fish populations by determining the best strategy and the urgency with which it should be applied (Dawson *et al.*, 2011). For example, understanding a species' vulnerability may inform managers that an intensive approach is required involving assisted migrations outside of a species' native range (Dawson *et al.*, 2011; Lunt *et al.*, 2013); although such assistance is still debated due to potential unintended consequences (Ricciardi & Simberloff, 2009). Within freshwater environments there is also potential for mitigation against thermal increase, for example by planting trees to provide shading where temperatures are predicted to exceed optimum or reach critically high levels for growth and survival of fish populations (Jackson *et al.*, 2016). Understanding the capacity of farmed species to cope with changes to the environment (Castanheira *et al.*, 2017) and the potential to select species suited to future conditions (Callaway *et al.*, 2012) could buffer some of the detrimental consequences of climate change both on food production and the environment. Active research in these areas will enable management of associated risks.

## OVEREXPLOITATION

Overexploitation of fish stocks, in addition to the removal of individuals, can induce phenotypic shifts in life-history traits of remaining fish and thus disrupt
size-dependent community and ecosystem functioning (Pauly et al., 1998; Branch et al., 2010; Kuparinen et al., 2016; Graham et al., 2017). To achieve more ecologically and socially sustainable management schemes, especially in the wider context of increasing climate-induced pressures, balanced harvesting strategies (Garcia et al., 2012) and spatially or evolutionarily explicit, ecosystem-based approaches have emerged as alternatives to traditional individual-species management (Pikitch et al., 2004; Laugen et al., 2014; Möllmann et al., 2014; Patrick & Link, 2015). These ecosystem-based approaches are designed to prioritize management of the ecosystem through defined biological and societal objectives, ultimately supporting target fisheries (Pikitch et al., 2004; Garcia & Cochrane, 2005; Ruckelshaus et al., 2008). While these approaches remain largely in their infancy and challenges regarding implementation still remain, recent models show that such approaches can be very effective management strategies to achieve multiple social, economic and ecological objectives simultaneously (Fulton et al., 2014). The adoption of ecosystem-based management regimes represents the best option for sustainable management, but is a complex process involving many organizations, communities and stakeholders. Implementation is therefore challenging, but it has been shown to be achievable (Garcia & Cochrane, 2005; Olsson et al., 2008). For example, management of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in Australia transitioned from protection of individual reefs to the wider-scale seascape through reorganization of the park authority, which enabled better collaboration with scientists and increased public awareness of threats (Olsson et al., 2008; Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat, 2013).

## PROTECTED AREAS

Marine and freshwater protected areas (i.e. aquatic areas where fishing or other activities are limited or prohibited) represent an important tool for recovery and replenishment of exploited stocks and facilitation of adaptation to climate change if implemented, managed and enforced appropriately (Huntington et al., 2010; Edgar et al., 2014; Gill et al., 2017; Roberts et al., 2017). Development in the design and implementation of aquatic protected areas has focused on integrating and improving resilience to climate change and enhancing socio-ecological capacities (Cinner et al., 2009). Additionally, an improvement in reserve design and consideration of global marine reserve connectivity and larval supply can serve to better direct reserve benefits to both people and the environment (Chollett et al., 2016; Andrello et al., 2017; Krueck et al., 2017a). This can optimize the trade-off between conservation and fisheries production (Gaines et al., 2010; Brown et al., 2015; Chollett et al., 2016). Similarly, in freshwater systems, improvements in management using protected areas have enhanced the connectivity of important sections of rivers, lakes and estuaries (Pittock et al., 2015; Harrison et al., 2016).

## EMERGING ANALYTICAL BIOTECHNOLOGIES

Rapid technological and computational developments have resulted in the development and improvement of technologies for understanding, monitoring and protecting fish populations (Paris et al., 2018). For example, microchemical analyses of both otoliths and other calcified structures in fishes are widely used as valuable tools for understanding the age structures, life histories, habitat use, migration routes and dietary
patterns of many fish populations (Campana, 2005; Tzadik *et al.*, 2017), and have contributed significantly to population management and conservation over time.

In recent decades, genetic sequencing technologies have undergone dramatic development, resulting in major advances in all areas of biology, including for fish biology. The resulting ease of generating and interpreting sequence information for many fish species has increased our knowledge of their evolutionary biology and adaptive physiology, as well as our understanding of how these features change for populations under environmental stress (Uren Webster *et al.*, 2013 and Paris *et al.*, 2015 for examples regarding populations of fish living in metal contaminated rivers). Further, DNA barcoding now allows global tracking of seafood fraud (Pardo *et al.*, 2016), and next-generation sequencing-based eDNA metabarcoding can be used to effectively detect non-native and endangered species when this was hitherto impractical (Bohmann *et al.*, 2014). Use of eDNA is arguably on the verge of revolutionizing fish community monitoring (Valentini *et al.*, 2016) and is becoming an effective tool for monitoring the health of aquatic ecosystems (Chariton *et al.*, 2015; Aylagas *et al.*, 2016). For example, in an Australian riverine system, eDNA has been used to improve management and control of the invasive Eurasian perch *Perca fluviatilis* L. 1758 through high sensitivity of detection, allowing more accurate placement of exclusion barriers (Bylemans *et al.*, 2016). As technologies develop and their associated costs decrease, it is envisaged that sequencing will become progressively more powerful and widely used in managing fish populations worldwide. Together, the development of new technologies and improvements in well-established techniques are contributing significantly to better understand fish populations and improved management of fish and fisheries.

## BIG DATA

The growing availability of free or low-cost data from a wide range of remote sensing platforms, combined with miniaturization of data-storage devices, has provided the ability to collect large amounts of data that can be shared internationally between multi-disciplinary groups (Sbrocco & Barber, 2013, Yeager *et al.*, 2017). This is allowing development of big-data approaches in fish science, which have the potential to help tackle issues related to monitoring and mitigating changes in large-scale systems (Hampton *et al.*, 2013; Dafforn *et al.*, 2015). Future technological developments may lead to further dramatic improvements in the ability of scientists and environmental managers to assess and manage the effects of global change on fishes and fisheries.

## MODELLING

Major progress has been made in advanced modelling techniques, allowing society to transfer understanding of effects of environmental change on individual fish to population and community levels. For example, developments in computing and software have allowed for a range of food-web models, such as Ecopath (Christensen & Walters, 2004; Moloney *et al.*, 2005). Fisheries models are now expanding to include multiple trophic levels, allowing more informative predictions about the potential consequences of management strategies (Bozec *et al.*, 2016). Further, advanced modelling techniques facilitate greater understanding of key features of population dynamics, including energy budgets, reproduction, larval dispersal, recruitment, genetic changes
and productivity of fisheries (Dunlop *et al.*, 2009; Cheung *et al.*, 2010; Sibly *et al.*, 2013; Krueck *et al.*, 2017a), leading to improved utility for management and conservation. This potentially allows scientific advice to play a greater role in policy, as seen with successes such as the establishment of multi-disciplinary management indicators adopted by the E.U. Water Framework Directive (EC, 2016). Nevertheless, much of this advice can be further improved. The use of mandatory environmental impact assessments (EIA) in Europe has extended to many forms of aquatic development planning. Yet, the ability to predict robustly the outcomes of development and to engage effectively in post-scheme monitoring and adaptive management still constrain the practical application of EIA (Rose, 2000; Milner, 2015). Hydrological and ecological models have been used successfully in restoration of riverine habitats that have been affected by water extraction and associated altered flow regimes, which bodes well for future uses in similar systems (Webb *et al.*, 2017). Such models, combined with empirical research, were used to inform management decisions on flow regulation to increase fish spawning and recruitment on a flood plain on the River Murray, Australia (Arthington *et al.*, 2010; King *et al.*, 2010), demonstrating the potential of these approaches to improve the sustainability of fish populations.

## INTERDISCIPLINARY AND HOLISTIC THINKING

The severity of problems facing fishes and the difficulty of studying long-term anthropogenic changes have necessitated the development of new integrative and holistic ways of thinking in environmental biology. Multi-disciplinary, ecosystem-based approaches have emerged as particularly promising novel frameworks, resulting in significant advances in both research and management applications. For instance, local societal and ecological changes have been linked to global climate change (Karnauskas *et al.*, 2015), biophysical modelling has been integrated with population genetics (Selkoe *et al.*, 2008), ecosystem service ideas have been expanded to include relational values (Chan *et al.*, 2016), and fisheries sustainability has been added to biodiversity in considering the effectiveness of marine protected areas (Krueck *et al.*, 2017b). Furthermore, recent ideas promote decision-making based upon expected future ecosystem states, as opposed to past baselines, to increase the efficacy of future management strategies (Rogers *et al.*, 2015). Calls for anticipative management of this nature have led to increased understanding of the subtle variations characterizing degraded environments as well as the novel fish assemblages that arise from warming-induced range shifts and abundance changes (Harborne & Mumby, 2011; Simpson *et al.*, 2011a; Salvanes *et al.*, 2015; Mumby, 2017) and have the potential to prevent problems before they occur.

## ADDRESSING FUTURE CHALLENGES

Despite significant recent advances in assessing the responses of fishes to global change, key challenges remain. Ultimately, many of the most pervasive problems facing global fish populations can only be mitigated through collaborative efforts involving both scientists and wider society (Sutherland *et al.*, 2006; Lynch *et al.*, 2015). Future efforts must, therefore, use both scientific and societal approaches in order to most effectively secure a future for fishes worldwide (Cooke *et al.*, 2016).
# SCIENTIFIC CHALLENGES

## Ultimate consequences

Understanding how individual-level responses to environmental change affect individual fitness, and subsequent population and ecosystem-scale effects, is a major challenge (Rolls et al., 2017; Windsor et al., 2018). This includes the development of suitable techniques for understanding multiple stressor effects in ecologically realistic settings at the broadest scales of biological organization (Dafforn et al., 2015). For example, context-dependent responses to cumulative stressors often lead to uncertainty in predicting the outcomes of ecosystem disturbance. Improving our ability to quantify and model these uncertainties is important in order to increase our understanding of system-level responses to environmental change (Mumby & van Woesik, 2014). Furthermore, identifying and quantifying links between observed ecological effects and provision of ecosystem services is important for demonstrating the relevance of research findings to a wider societal audience and for effective action (Hering et al., 2015).

## Indirect effects

Indirect effects of environmental change are important in defining its consequences for ecosystems. For example, the emergence of novel habitats resulting from environmental modification might provide new niches but also serious challenges for fish communities if these modifications impede migration pathways and reduce connectivity among crucial habitats (Acreman et al., 2014; Graham et al., 2014). Predicting the constituents of these altered habitats and the likely responses of existing fish communities to change represents a considerable current knowledge gap.

## Understanding acclimation and adaptation

The potential for acclimation and adaptation to environmental change and disturbances is a crucial determinant of population persistence and productivity (Munday et al., 2017). These mechanisms are fundamental to ecosystem resilience, and are therefore central in identifying the actual ecological risks presented by environmental stressors. Intra-specific variation in responses is often overlooked, despite potentially important implications for the ability of fish populations to exhibit short-term and evolutionary responses to stressors (Radford et al., 2016; Ellis et al., 2017). Understanding the mechanisms underpinning population responses and their variability and integrating this knowledge into predictive models (Piou et al., 2015) are important to appropriately manage fish populations and communities under stress.

## Long-term datasets

Determining the effects of global change on fishes is problematic without extensive, long-term datasets (Soranno & Schimel, 2014). In many cases, the data required to answer certain macro-scale questions are not available, and expansion of existing data-sharing practices in conjunction with data collection networks is required to facilitate long-term ecosystem-scale analysis (Laney et al., 2015). In cases where technological advances have allowed collection of large datasets, current computational
capabilities are not always sufficient for appropriate storage, sharing and analysis of these data (i.e., dealing with a data deluge), and greater investment in infrastructure and computational capacity is required (Hallgren *et al.*, 2016). A further aspect of engaging with big data and tackling large-scale questions revolves around contributing to global, interdisciplinary initiatives (Hampton *et al.*, 2013). For instance, understanding fully the potential environmental risk of microplastics in aquatic environments will require a collaborative effort from multiple disciplines including chemistry, hydrology, ethology and ecotoxicology (Wagner *et al.*, 2014). Similarly, multidisciplinary approaches will be required to address other large-scale threats, including those arising from pollution and climate change. Therefore, fostering collaborations between disciplines is of vital importance for determining the likely consequences of global change upon ecosystems and implementing sustainable solutions for these problems (Holm *et al.*, 2013).

## SOCIETAL CHALLENGES

### Widening participation

Effective communication of the problems facing fish and fisheries, the scientific solutions and the potential options for the future is of fundamental importance. Public support for research and management can be enhanced by instilling and nurturing an ethos of care and value among communities of people. Promoting the involvement of the non-scientific community in data collection and decision making is important in gaining momentum towards positive change (Wiber *et al.*, 2009). In particular, incorporating indigenous communities' local knowledge and cultural values into ecosystem management strategies is a fundamentally important challenge for improving their success (King & Brown, 2010; Finn & Jackson, 2011). A number of citizen-science projects focussing on data collection for fishes already exist (Hyder *et al.*, 2015). Despite this, the absence of best practice regarding these processes is hindering progress and positive change through public engagement. Improving transparency and feedback within communication pathways between scientists and the public may enhance participation in management of fish populations (Dickinson *et al.*, 2012). Improved stakeholder interaction and better use of citizen science also requires development of novel information technology tools and mobile applications that allow for the collection and use of data by the public (Hyder *et al.*, 2015).

### Spatial boundaries

Practical solutions are necessary to overcome existing issues regarding the use of ecologically arbitrary spatial boundaries to separate the dynamic environment of open water bodies (e.g. exclusive economic zones), which can prevent current management strategies from reaching their full potential (Song *et al.*, 2017). Ultimately, sympathetic and inclusive management measures at a range of spatial scales (local, international or global) are required, and this can aid with compliance in strategy implementation (Ramírez-Monsalve *et al.*, 2016).

### Political landscapes

The global political landscape provides a major challenge to researching and managing fish populations. Destabilization of both domestic and international politics affects
the international scientific community worldwide and the translation of discoveries into effective management; examples include uncertainty surrounding the consequences of the U.K. cancelling its membership of the E.U. on fisheries and nature conservation policies (Rush & Solandt, 2017), potential changes in European marine environmental protection policy (Boyes & Elliott, 2016) and breakdowns in transboundary agreements regarding the management of South China Sea fish stocks (Teh et al., 2017). The world currently faces dramatic changes to ecological, societal and political environments. Maintaining consistency and employing robust management strategies such that political uncertainty does not result in degraded ecosystems is, and will continue to be, a major challenge for the future.

## Public concern for fish welfare

Public concern for fish welfare in aquaculture (e.g. the presence of sea lice) and both commercial and recreational fishing appears to lag behind that for terrestrial farming, but voices of concern are growing and evidence is accumulating on this contentious and challenging issue (Huntingford & Kadri, 2014; Brown, 2015; Stevens et al., 2017). However, current data and knowledge are insufficient for representatively assessing the current state of fish welfare and supporting significant improvements in this area (Röcklinsberg, 2015). Continued research on fish welfare topics is required to address this knowledge gap, and public engagement needs to become a priority for changing attitudes and implementing positive action in this area.

## Prioritization of resources

It may be necessary to prioritize specific avenues for research, management or regulation in the face of a rapidly changing global environment and limited resources. Problem areas that may benefit from rapid intervention to address emergent threats should be given a higher priority compared with others where immediate action may not be necessary or effective. Such prioritization should be based not only on scientific merit, but also inclusion of societal requirements, conservation and management strategies (Gullestad et al., 2017). For example, proposed habitat developments (e.g. hydropower) should increasingly weigh up the cost to biodiversity and fish productivity against societal requirements, to avoid negative consequences for aquatic conservation and ecosystem services (Ziv et al., 2012; Winemiller et al., 2016). Alternatively, aquatic infrastructure can potentially be eco-engineered to minimize adverse impacts and provide benefits to a range of taxa (Perkins et al., 2015). Increasingly, compromises must be made between the amount of scientific evidence required to competently answer research problems and the need to provide timely advice to inform decision-making and management (i.e. a quest for perfection should not be an enemy of plain good). There is increasing concern regarding the rate of global change and the risk of overly cautious scientific conclusions limiting the onset, speed and potential benefits of effective management decisions. Some management decisions need to be made on priority issues with best current knowledge using precautionary principles, rather than waiting for complete datasets to be generated, in the knowledge that in the future decisions may be adjusted as new data emerge. This bolder management approach can accelerate the management of new challenges and prevent deterioration of the environment.
CONCLUSION

Fish populations worldwide face a multitude of threats ultimately stemming from human population growth and altered resource use. These threats present dramatic challenges for both science and society today, but a range of successes over past decades provide a roadmap for many of these challenges to be met effectively. For example, major scientific, technological and conceptual advances associated with big data and new computational and genetic techniques have increased our ability to manage fish populations effectively, at least in more economically developed nations. However, significant ecological, political and societal challenges must still be met to secure a future for the world's fishes (and in doing so, their entire supporting ecosystems). This requires global and collaborative efforts to achieve effective solutions for sustainable fisheries and ecosystems. The rate of global change threatening fishes worldwide is such that time has become the most precious commodity in mitigating the threats faced by fish populations. Urgent and bolder action is needed for the effective protection of ecosystems and the services they provide for human populations across the globe.

This paper was initiated during the 50th Anniversary Symposium of The Fisheries Society of the British Isles (FSBI) at the University of Exeter, UK, in July 2017. The authors thank FSBI and conference organizers and hosts for facilitating these discussions. Several authors received financial support to participate in the conference; R.C.W. thanks Sêr Cymru National Research Network for Low Carbon, Energy & Environment, and F.H.M. thanks the Bonus Baltic Sea research and development programme (Art 185) BIO-C3 project, funded jointly by the E.U. and the BMBF (Grant No. 03F0682A), for providing this funding. T. A. C. G., H. R. H., D. W. M. and F. M. W. thank the Natural Environment Research Council GW4+ DTP [NE/L002434/1].

This is contribution #79 from the Marine Education and Research Center in the Institute for Water and Environment at Florida International University.

All authors contributed to discussions in preparation of this paper during a workshop at the 50th Anniversary Symposium of The Fisheries Society of the British Isles, held at the University of Exeter in July 2017. All authors contributed to original content and ideas and made comments on early versions of the manuscript. J.K.P. wrote summary notes from the original discussion. F.K.C., I.K.D., W.D., D.W.M., R.C.W. and F.M.W. reviewed the literature on specific themes and wrote section drafts for ‘Issues facing fishes today’ (W.D. & I.K.D.), ‘Learning from previous successes’ (F.K.C. & D.W.M.) and ‘Addressing future challenges’ (R.C.W. & F.M.W.). T.A.C.G. and H.R.H. designed the overall structure, collated section drafts and author comments and wrote the final version of the paper. E.M.S. chaired the original discussion, revised drafts at multiple stages, and supervised the completion of the final version of the paper.

References

Acreman, M., Arthington, A. H., Colloff, M. J., Couch, C., Crossman, N. D., Dyer, F., Overton, I., Pollino, C. A., Stewardson, M. J. & Young, W. (2014). Environmental flows for natural, hybrid, and novel riverine ecosystems in a changing world. *Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment* **12**, 466–473.

Allan, J. D., Abell, R., Hogan, Z., Revenga, C., Taylor, B. W., Welcome, R. L. & Winemiller, K. (2005). Overfishing of inland waters. *Bioscience* **55**, 1041–1051.

Andrello, M., Guilhaumon, F., Albouy, C., Parravicini, V., Scholtens, J., Verley, P., Barange, M., Sumaila, U. R., Manel, S. & Mouillot, D. (2017). Global mismatch between fishing dependency and larval supply from marine reserves. *Nature Communications* **8**, 16039. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms16039

Arthington, A. H., Naiman, R. J., McClain, M. E. & Nilsson, C. (2010). Preserving the bio-diversity and ecological services of rivers: new challenges and research opportunities. *Freshwater Biology* **55**, 1–16.
Arthington, A. H., Dulvy, N. K., Gladstone, W. & Winfield, I. J. (2016). Fish conservation in freshwater and marine realms: status, threats and management. *Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems* **26**, 838–857.

Aylagas, E., Borja, A., Irigoien, X. & Rodriguez-Ezpeleta, N. (2016). Benchmarking DNA metabarcoding for biodiversity-based monitoring and assessment. In *Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Science in Assessing the Health Status of Marine Ecosystems, Frontiers in Marine Science* (Borja, A., Elliott, M., Uyarra, M. C., Carstensen, J. & Mea, M., eds), pp. 165–176. Lausanne: Frontiers in Marine Science Available at https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/2419803/fmars-03-00175.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y/

Beguer-Pon, M., Castonguay, M., Shan, S. L., Benchetrit, J. & Dodson, J. J. (2015). Direct observations of American eels migrating across the continental shelf to the Sargasso Sea. *Nature Communications* **6**, 8705. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9705

Beldade, R., Blandin, A., O'Donnell, R. & Mills, S. C. (2017). Cascading fitness effects of anemone bleaching on associated anemonefish hormones and reproduction. *Nature Communications* **8**, 716. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00565-w

Bohmann, K., Evans, A., Gilbert, M. T. P., Carvalho, G. R., Creer, S., Knapp, M., Yu, D. W. & de Bruyn, M. (2014). Environmental DNA for wildlife biology and biodiversity monitoring. *Trends in Ecology and Evolution* **29**, 358–367.

Bozec, Y. M., O'Farrell, S., Bruggemann, H., Luckhurst, B. E. & Mumby, P. J. (2016). Tradeoffs between fisheries harvest and the resilience of coral reefs. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences* **113**, 4536–4541.

Branch, T. A., Watson, R. & Fulton, E. A. (2010). The trophic fingerprint of marine fisheries. *Nature* **468**, 431–435.

Brown, C. (2015). Fish intelligence, sentience and ethics. *Animal Cognition* **18**, 1–17.

Brown, C. J., White, C., Beger, M., Grantham, H. S., Halpern, B. S., Klein, C. J., Mumby, P. J., Tulloch, V. J. D., Ruckelshaus, M. & Possingham, H. P. (2015). Fisheries and biodiversity benefits of using static versus dynamic models for designing marine reserve networks. *Ecosphere* **6**, 1–14.

Bylemans, J., Furlan, E. M., Pearce, L., Daly, T. & Gleeson, D. M. (2016). Improving the containment of a freshwater invader using environment DNA (eDNA) based monitoring. *Biological Invasions* **18**, 3081–3089.

Callaway, R., Shinn, A. P., Grenfell, S. E., Bron, J. E., Burnell, G., Cook, E. J., Crumlish, M., Culloty, S., Davidson, K., Ellis, R. P., Flynn, K. J., Fox, C., Green, D. M., Hays, G. C., Hughes, A. D., Johnston, E., Lowe, C. D., Lupatsch, I., Malham, S., Mendzil, A. F., Nickell, T., Pickerell, T., Rowley, A. F., Stanley, M. S., Tocher, D. R., Turnbull, J. F., Webb, G., Wootton, E. & Shields, R. J. (2012). Review of climate change impacts on marine aquaculture in the UK and Ireland. *Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems* **22**, 389–421.

Castanheira, M. F., Conceicao, L. E. C., Millot, S., Rey, S., Begout, M. L., Damsgard, B., Kristiansen, T., Hoglund, E., Overli, O. & Martins, C. I. M. (2017). Coping styles in farmed fish: consequences for aquaculture. *Reviews in Aquaculture* **9**, 23–41.

Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P. R. & Dirzo, R. (2017). Biological annihilation *via* the ongoing sixth mass extinction signaled by vertebrate population losses and declines. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America* **114**, E6089–E6096.

Chan, K. M. A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M. & Díaz, S. (2016). Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America* **113**, 1462–1465.

Chariton, A. A., Stephenson, S., Morgan, M. J., Steven, A. D. L., Colloff, M. J., Court, L. N. & Hardy, C. M. (2015). Metabarcoding of benthic eukaryote communities predicts the ecological condition of estuaries. *Environmental Pollution* **203**, 165–174.

Cheung, W. W. L., Lam, V. W. Y., Sarmiento, J. L., Kearney, K., Watson, R., Zeller, D. & Pauly, D. (2010). Large-scale redistribution of maximum fisheries catch potential in the global ocean under climate change. *Global Change Biology* **16**, 24–35.

Cheung, W. W. L., Sarmiento, J. L., Dunne, J., Frölicher, T. L., Lam, V. W. Y., Palomares, M. L. D., Watson, R. & Pauly, D. (2013). Shrinking of fishes exacerbates impacts of global ocean changes on marine ecosystems. *Nature Climate Change* **3**, 254–258.
Chollett, I., Garavelli, L., O'Farrell, S., Cherubin, L., Matthews, T. R., Mumby, P. J. & Box, S. J. (2016). A genuine win-win: resolving the “conserve or catch” conflict in marine reserve network design. *Conservation Letters* **10**, 555–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12318

Christensen, V. & Walters, C. J. (2004). Ecopath with Ecosim: methods, capabilities and limitations. *Ecological Modelling* **172**, 109–139.

Cinner, J. E., McClanahan, T. R., Daw, T. M., Graham, N. A., Maina, J., Wilson, S. K. & Hughes, T. P. (2009). Linking social and ecological systems to sustain coral reef fisheries. *Current Biology* **19**, 206–212.

Comte, L. & Grenouillet, G. (2013). Do stream fish track climate change? Assessing distribution shifts in recent decades. *Ecography* **36**, 1236–1246.

Cooke, S. J., Allison, E. H., Beard, T. D., Arlinghaus, R., Arthington, A. H., Bartley, D. M., Cowx, I. G., Fuentevilla, C., Leonard, N. J., Lorenzen, K., Lynch, A. J., Nguyen, V. M., Youn, S. J., Taylor, W. W. & Welcomme, R. L. (2016). On the sustainability of inland fisheries: finding a future for the forgotten. *Ambio* **45**, 753–764.

Crain, C. M., Kroeker, K. & Halpern, B. S. (2008). Interactive and cumulative effects of multiple human stressors in marine systems. *Ecology Letters* **11**, 1304–1315.

Dafforn, K. A., Johnston, E. L., Ferguson, A., Humphrey, C. L., Monk, W., Nichols, S. J., Simpson, S. L., Tulbure, M. G. & Baird, D. J. (2015). Big data opportunities and challenges for assessing multiple stressors across scales in aquatic ecosystems. *Marine and Freshwater Research* **67**, 393–413.

Darling, E. S. & Côté, I. M. (2008). Quantifying the evidence for ecological synergies. *Ecology Letters* **11**, 1278–1286.

Dawson, T. P., Jackson, S. T., House, J. I., Prentice, I. C. & Mace, G. M. (2011). Beyond predictions: biodiversity conservation in a changing climate. *Science* **332**, 53–58.

Deutsch, C., Brix, H., Ito, T., Frenzel, H. & Thompson, L. (2011). Climate-forced variability of ocean hypoxia. *Science* **333**, 336–339.

Diaz, R. J. & Rosenberg, R. (2008). Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems. *Science* **321**, 926–929.

Dickinson, J. L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R. L., Martin, J., Phillips, T. & Purcell, K. (2012). The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. *Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment* **10**, 291–297.

Dudgeon, D., Arthington, A. H., Gessner, M. O., Kawabata, Z., Knowler, D., Lévêque, C., Naiman, R. J., Prieur-Richard, A. H., Soto, D., Stiassny, M. L. J. & Sullivan, C. A. (2006). Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status, and conservation challenges. *Biological Reviews* **81**, 163–182.

Dunlop, E. S., Heino, M. & Dieckmann, U. (2009). Eco-genetic modeling of contemporary life-history evolution. *Ecological Applications* **19**, 1815–1834.

EC (2016). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy. *Official Journal of the European Communities* L 327, 1–72 Available at www.eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:020:0007:0025:EN:PDF

Edgar, G. J., Stuart-Smith, R. D., Willis, T. J., Kininmonth, S., Baker, S. C., Banks, S., Barrett, N. S., Becerro, M. A., Bernard, A. T. F., Berkhout, J., Buxton, C. D., Campbell, S. J., Cooper, A. T., Davey, M., Edgar, S. C., Försterra, G., Galván, D. E., Irigoyen, A. J., Kushner, D. J., Moura, R., Parnell, P. E., Shears, N. T., Soler, G., Strain, E. M. A. & Thomson, R. J. (2014). Global conservation outcomes depend on marine protected areas with five key features. *Nature* **506**, 216–220.

Ellis, R. P., Davison, W., Queirós, A. M., Kroeker, K. J., Calosi, P., Dupont, S., Spicer, J. I., Wilson, R. W., Widdicombe, S. & Urbina, M. A. (2017). Does sex really matter? Explaining intraspecies variation in ocean acidification responses. *Biology Letters* **13**, 20160761. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0761

Favaro, B., Lichota, C., Côté, I. M. & Duff, S. D. (2011). TrapCam: an inexpensive camera system for studying deep-water animals. *Methods in Ecology and Evolution* **3**, 39–46.

Feil, R. & Fraga, M. F. (2012). Epigenetics and the environment: emerging patterns and implications. *Nature Reviews Genetics* **13**, 97–109.

Fernandes, J. A., Papathanasopoulou, E., Hattam, C., Queirós, A. M., Cheung, W. W. L. & Yool, A. (2016). Estimating the ecological, economic and social impacts of ocean acidification and warming on UK fisheries. *Fish and Fisheries* **18**, 389–411.
Finn, M. & Jackson, S. (2011). Protecting indigenous values in water management: a challenge to conventional environmental flow assessments. *Ecosystems* **14**, 1232–1248.

Fitzgerald, J. A., Jameson, H. M., Dewar Fowler, V. H., Bond, G. L., Bickley, L. K., Uren Webster, T. M., Bury, N. R., Wilson, R. J. & Santos, E. M. (2016). Hypoxia suppressed copper toxicity during early development in zebrafish embryos in a process mediated by the activation of the HIF signalling pathway. *Environmental Science & Technology* **50**, 4502–4512.

Fitzgerald, J. A., Katsiadaki, I. & Santos, E. M. (2017). Contrasting effects of hypoxia on copper toxicity during development in the three-spined stickleback (*Gasterosteus aculeatus*). *Environmental Pollution* **222**, 433–443.

Foley, J. A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K. A., Cassidy, E. S., Gerber, J. S., Johnston, M., Mueller, N. D., O'Connell, C., Ray, D. K., West, P. C., Balzer, C., Bennett, E. M., Carpenter, S. R., Hill, J., Monfreda, C., Polasky, S. & Rockström, M., Sheehan, J., Siebert, S., Tilman, D. & Zaks, D. P. M. (2011). Solutions for a cultivated planet. *Nature* **478**, 337–342.

Fossheim, M., Primicerio, R., Johannesen, E., Ingvaldsen, R. B., Aschan, M. M. & Dolgov, A. V. (2015). Recent warming leads to a rapid borealization of fish communities in the Arctic. *Nature Climate Change* **5**, 673–677.

Fulton, E. A., Smith, A. D. M., Smith, D. C. & Johnson, P. (2014). An integrated approach is needed for ecosystem based fisheries management: insights from ecosystem-level management strategy evaluation. *PLoS One* **9**, e84242. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084242

Gaines, S. D., White, C., Carr, M. H. & Palumbi, S. R. (2010). Designing marine reserve networks for both conservation and fisheries management. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **107**, 18286–18293.

Gallardo, B., Clavero, M. & Sánchez, V. & Vilà, M. (2015). Global ecological impacts of invasive species in aquatic ecosystems. *Global Change Biology* **22**, 151–161.

Gallo, N. D. & Levin, L. A. (2016). Fish ecology and evolution in the world's oxygen minimum zones and implications of ocean deoxygenation. *Advances in Marine Biology* **74**, 117–198.

Garcia, S. M. & Cochrane, K. L. (2005). Ecosystem approach to fisheries: a review of implementation guidelines. *ICES Journal of Marine Science* **62**, 311–318.

Garcia, S. M., Kolding, J., Rice, J., Rochet, M.-J., Zhou, S., Arimoto, T., Beyer, J. E., Borges, L., Bundy, A., Dunn, D., Fulton, E. A., Hall, M., Heino, M., Law, R., Makino, M., Rijnsdorp, A. D., Simard, F. & Smith, A. D. M. (2012). Reconsidering the consequences of selective fisheries. *Science* **335**, 1045–1047.

Gill, D. A., Mascia, M. B., Ahmadia, G. N., Glew, L., Lester, S. E., Barnes, M., Craigie, I., Daring, E. S., Free, C. M., Geldmann, J., Holst, S., Jensen, O. P., White, A. T., Basurto, X., Coad, L., Gates, R. D., Guannel, G., Mumby, P. J., Thomas, H., Whitmee, S., Woodley, S. & Fox, H. E. (2017). Capacity shortfalls hinder the performance of marine protected areas globally. *Nature* **543**, 665–669.

Graham, C. T. & Harrod, C. (2009). Implications of climate change for the fishes of the British isles. *Journal of Fish Biology* **74**, 1143–1205.

Graham, N. A. J., Cinner, J. E., Norström, A. V. & Nyström, M. (2014). Coral reefs as novel ecosystems: embracing new futures. *Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability* **7**, 9–14.

Graham, N. A. J., Jennings, S., MacNeil, M. A., Mouillot, D. & Wilson, S. K. (2015). Predicting climate-driven regime shifts versus rebound potential in coral reefs. *Nature* **518**, 94–97.

Graham, N. A. J., McClanahan, T. R., MacNeil, M. A., Wilson, S. K., Cinner, J. E., Huchery, C. & Holmes, T. H. (2017). Human disruption of coral reef trophic structure. *Current Biology* **27**, 231–236.

Gullestad, P., Abotnes, A. M., Bakke, G., Skern-Mauritzen, M., Nedreaas, K. & Søvik, G. (2017). Towards ecosystem-based fisheries management in Norway – practical tools for keeping track of relevant issues and prioritising management efforts. *Marine Policy* **77**, 104–110.
Hallgren, W., Beaumont, L., Bowness, A., Chambers, L., Graham, E., Holewa, H., Laffan, S., Mackey, B., Nix, H., Price, J., Vanderwal, J., Warren, R. & Weis, G. (2016). The biodiversity and climate change virtual laboratory: where ecology meets big data. *Environmental Modelling & Software* **76**, 182–186.

Halpern, B. S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K. A., Kappel, C. V., Micheli, F., D'Agrosa, C., Bruno, J. F., Casey, K. S., Ebert, C. E., Fox, H. E., Fujita, R., Heinemann, D., Lenihan, H. S., Madin, E. M. P., Perry, M. T., Selig, E. R., Spalding, M., Steneck, R. & Watson, R. (2008). A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. *Science* **319**, 948–953.

Hamilton, P. B., Cowx, I. G., Oleksiak, M. F., Griffiths, A. M., Grahn, M., Stevens, J. R., Carvalho, G. R., Nicol, E. & Tyler, C. R. (2016). Population-level consequences for wild fish exposed to sublethal concentrations of chemicals – a critical review. *Fish and Fisheries* **17**, 545–566.

Hampton, S. E., Strasser, C. A., Tewksbury, J. J., Gram, W. K., Budden, A. E., Batcheller, A. L., Duke, C. S. & Porter, J. S. (2013). Big data and the future of ecology. *Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment* **11**, 156–162.

Harborne, A. R. & Mumby, P. J. (2011). Novel ecosystems: altering fish assemblages in warming waters. *Current Biology* **21**, R822–R824.

Harrison, I. J., Green, P. A., Farrell, T. A., Juffe-Bignoli, D., Sáenz, L. & Vörösmarty, C. J. (2016). Protected areas and freshwater provisioning: a global assessment of freshwater provision, threats, and management strategies to support human water security. *Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems* **26**, 103–120.

Hering, D., Carvalho, L., Argillier, C., Beklioglu, M., Borja, A., Cardoso, A. C., Duel, H., Ferreira, T., Globevnik, L., Hanganu, J., Hellsten, S., Jeppesen, E., Kodeš, V., Solheim, A. L., Nõges, T., Ormerod, S., Panagopoulos, Y., Schmutz, S., Venohr, M. & Birk, S. (2015). Managing aquatic ecosystems and water resources under multiple stress – an introduction to the MARS project. *Science of the Total Environment* **503–504**, 10–21.

Holm, P., Goodsite, M. E., Cloetingh, S., Agnoletti, M., Moldan, B., Lang, D. J., Leemans, R., Moeller, J. O., Buendía, M. P. & Pohl, W. (2013). Collaboration between the natural, social and human sciences in global change research. *Environmental Science & Policy* **28**, 25–35.

Holmlund, C. M. & Hammer, M. (1999). Ecosystem services generated by fish populations. *Ecological Economics* **29**, 253–268.

Hughes, T. P., Barnes, M. L., Bellwood, D. R., Cinner, J. E., Cumming, G. S., Jackson, J. B. C., Kleypas, J., van de Leemput, I. A., Lough, J. M., Morrison, T. H., Palumbi, S. R., van Nes, E. H. & Scheffer, M. (2017). Coral reefs in the Anthropocene. *Nature* **546**, 82–90.

Huntingford, F. A. & Kadri, S. (2014). Defining, assessing and promoting the welfare of farmed fish. *Revue Scientifique et Technique-office international des Epizooties* **33**, 233–244.

Huntington, B. E., Karnauskas, M., Babcock, E. A. & Lirman, D. (2010). Untangling natural seascape variation from marine reserve effects using a landscape approach. *PloS ONE* **5**, e12327. doi: org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012327

Hyder, K., Townhill, B., Anderson, L. G., Delany, J. & Pinnegar, J. K. (2015). Can citizen science contribute to the evidence-base that underpins marine policy? *Marine Policy* **59**, 112–120.

Incardona, J. P., Gardner, L. D., Linbo, T. L., Brown, T. L., Esbaugh, A. J., Mager, E. M., Stieglitz, J. D., French, B. L., Labenia, J. S., Laetz, C. A., Tagal, M., Sloan, C. A., Elizur, A., Benetti, D. D., Grosell, M., Block, B. A. & Schol, N. L. (2014). *Deepwater Horizon* crude oil impacts the developing hearts of large predatory pelagic fish. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America* **111**, E1510–E1518.

Jackson, F. L., Malcolm, I. A. & Hannah, D. M. (2016). A novel approach for designing large-scale river temperature monitoring networks. *Hydrology Research* **47**, 569–590.

Jenny, J.-P., Francus, P., Normandeau, A., Lapointe, F., Perga, M.-E., Ojala, A., Schimmelmann, A. & Zolitschka, B. (2016). Global spread of hypoxia in freshwater ecosystems during the last three centuries is caused by rising local human pressure. *Global Change Biology* **22**, 1481–1489.

Jobling, S., Nolan, M., Tyler, C. R., Brighty, G. & Sumpter, J. P. (1998). Widespread sexual disruption in wild fish. *Environmental Science & Technology* **32**, 2498–2506.
Jobling, S., Williams, R., Johnson, A., Taylor, A., Gross-Sokorin, M., Nolan, M., Tyler, C. R., van Aerle, R., Santos, E. & Brighty, G. (2006). Predicted exposures to steroid estrogens in U.K. rivers correlate with widespread sexual disruption in wild fish populations. *Environmental Health Perspectives* **114**, 32–39.

Johansen, J. L., Allan, B. J. M., Rummer, J. L. & Esbaugh, A. J. (2017). Oil exposure disrupts early life-history stages of coral reef fishes via behavioural impairments. *Nature Ecology and Evolution* **1**, 1146–1152.

Jones, P. D. (2006). Water quality and fisheries in the Mersey estuary, England: a historical perspective. *Marine Pollution Bulletin* **53**, 144–154.

Jones, K. C. & de Voogt, P. (1999). Persistent organic pollutants (POPs): state of the science. *Environmental Pollution* **100**, 209–221.

Jørgensen, E. H. & Johnsen, H. K. (2014). Rhythmic life of the Arctic charr: adaptations to life at the edge. *Marine Genomics* **14**, 71–81.

Jørgensen, C., Enberg, K., Dunlop, E. S., Arlinghaus, R., Boukal, D. S., Brander, K., Ernande, B., Gårdmark, A., Johnston, F., Matsumura, S., Pardoe, H., Raab, K., Silva, A., Vainikka, A., Dieckmann, U., Heino, M. & Rijnsdorp, A. D. (2007). Managing evolving fish stocks. *Science* **318**, 1247–1248.

Karnauskas, M., Schirripa, M. J., Craig, J. K., Cook, G. S., Kelble, C. R., Agar, J. J., Black, B. A., Enfield, D. B., Lindo-Atichati, D., Muhling, B. A., Purcell, K. M., Richards, P. M. & Wang, C. (2015). Evidence of climate-driven ecosystem reorganization in the Gulf of Mexico. *Global Change Biology* **21**, 2554–2568.

Kidd, K. A., Blanchfield, P. J., Mills, K. H., Palace, V. P., Evans, R. E., Lazorchak, J. M. & Flick, R. W. (2007). Collapse of a fish population after exposure to a synthetic estrogen. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **104**, 8897–8901.

King, J. & Brown, C. (2010). Integrated basin flow assessments: concepts and method development in Africa and South-East Asia. *Freshwater Biology* **55**, 127–146.

King, A. J., Ward, K. A., O’Connor, P., Green, D., Tonkin, Z. & Mahoney, J. (2010). Adaptive management of an environmental watering event to enhance native fish spawning and recruitment. *Freshwater Biology* **55**, 17–31.

Kroeker, K. J., Kordas, R. L. & Harley, C. D. G. (2017). Embracing interactions in ocean acidification research: confronting multiple stressor scenarios and context dependence. *Biology Letters* **13**, 20160802. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0802

Krueck, N. C., Ahmadia, G. N., Green, A., Jones, G. P., Possingham, H. P., Riginos, C., Treml, E. A. & Mumby, P. J. (2017a). Incorporating larval dispersal into MPA design for both conservation and fisheries. *Ecological Applications* **27**, 925–941.

Krueck, N. C., Ahmadia, G. N., Possingham, H. P., Riginos, C., Treml, E. A. & Mumby, P. J. (2017b). Marine reserve targets to sustain and rebuild unregulated fisheries. *PLoS Biology* **15**, e2000537. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2000537

Kuparinen, A. & Festa-Bianchet, M. (2017). Harvest-induced evolution: insights from aquatic and terrestrial systems. *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B* **372**, 20160036. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0036

Kuparinen, A., Boit, A., Valdovinos, F. S., Lassaux, H. & Martinez, N. D. (2016). Fishing-induced life-history changes degrade and destabilize harvested ecosystems. *Scientific Reports* **6**, 22245. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep22245

Laney, C. M., Pennington, D. D. & Tweedie, C. E. (2015). Filling the gaps: sensor network and data-sharing practices in ecological research. *Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment* **13**, 363–368.

Laugen, A. T., Engelhard, G. H., Whitlock, R., Arlinghaus, R., Dankel, D., Dunlop, E. S., Eike- set, A. M., Enberg, K., Jørgensen, C., Matsumura, S., Nusslé, S., Urbach, D., Baulier, L., Boukal, D. S., Ernande, B., Johnston, F., Mollet, F., Pardoe, H., Therkildsen, N. O., Uusi-Heikkila, S., Vainikka, A., Heino, M., Rijnsdorp, A. D. & Dieckmann, U. (2014). Evolutionary impact assessment: accounting for evolutionary consequences of fishing in an ecosystem approach to fisheries management. *Fish & Fisheries* **15**, 65–96.

Lunt, I. D., Byrne, M., Hellmann, J. J., Mitchell, N. J., Garnett, S. T., Hayward, M. W., Martin, T. G., McDonald-Maddden, E., Williams, S. E. & Zander, K. K. (2013). Using assisted colonisation to conserve biodiversity and restore ecosystem function under climate change. *Biological Conservation* **157**, 172–177.
Lynch, A. J., Varela-Acevedo, E. & Taylor, W. W. (2015). The need for decision-support tools for a changing climate: application to inland fisheries management. *Fisheries Management and Ecology* **22**, 14–24.

Lynch, A. J., Cooke, S. J., Deines, A. M., Bower, S. D., Bunnell, D. B., Cowx, I. G., Nguyen, V. M., Nohner, J., Phouthavong, K., Riley, B., Rogers, M. W., Taylor, W. W., Woelmer, W., Youn, S. J. & Beard, T. D. (2016). The social, economic, and environmental importance of inland fish and fisheries. *Environmental Reviews* **24**, 115–121.

McBryan, T. L., Anttila, K., Healy, T. M. & Schulte, P. M. (2013). Responses to temperature and hypoxia as interacting stressors in fish: implications for adaptation to environmental change. *Integrative and Comparative Biology* **53**, 648–659.

McCauley, D. J., Pinsky, M. L., Palumbi, S. R., Estes, J. A., Joyce, F. H. & Warner, R. R. (2015). Marine defaunation: animal loss in the global ocean. *Science* **347**, 1255641.

Middlemas, S. J., Fryer, R. J., Tulett, D. & Armstrong, J. D. (2013). Relationship between sea lice levels on sea trout and fish farm activity in western Scotland. *Fisheries Management Ecology* **20**, 68–74.

Mills, S. C. & Reynolds, J. D. (2004). The importance of species interactions in conservation: the endangered European bitterling, *Rhodeus sericeus* and its freshwater mussel hosts. *Animal Conservation* **7**, 257–263.

Milly, P. C. D., Dunne, K. A. & Vecchia, A. V. (2005). Global pattern of trends in streamflow and water availability in a changing climate. *Nature* **438**, 347–350.

Milner, N. J. (2015). Environmental assessment for fisheries. In *Freshwater Fisheries Ecology* (Craig, J. F., ed). Chichester: Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Möllmann, C., Lindegren, M., Blenckner, T., Bergström, L., Casini, M., Diekmann, R., Flinkman, J., Müller-Karulis, B., Neuenfeldt, S., Schmidt, J. O., Tomczak, M., Voss, R. & Gärdmark, A. (2014). Implementing ecosystem-based fisheries management: from single-species to integrated ecosystem assessment and advice for Baltic Sea fish stocks. *ICES Journal of Marine Science* **71**, 1187–1197.

Moloney, C. J., Jarre, A., Arancibia, H., Bozec, Y. M., Neira, S., Roux, J. P. & Shannon, L. (2005). Comparing the Benguela and Humbolt marine upwelling ecosystems with indicators from inter-calibrated models. *ICES Journal of Marine Systems* **62**, 493–502.

Mueller, N. D., Gerber, J. S., Johnston, M., Ray, D. K., Ramankutty, N. & Foley, J. A. (2012). Closing yield gaps through nutrient and water management. *Nature* **490**, 254–257.

Mumby, P. J. (2017). Embracing a world of subtlety and nuance on coral reefs. *Coral Reefs* **36**, 1003–1011.

Mumby, P. J. & van Woesik, R. (2014). Consequences of ecological, evolutionary and bio-geochemical uncertainty for coral reef responses to climatic stress. *Current Biology* **24**, 413–423.

Munday, P. L., McCormick, M. I. & Nilsson, G. E. (2012). Impact of global warming and rising CO₂ levels on coral reef fishes: what hope for the future? *Journal of Experimental Biology* **215**, 3865–3873.

Munday, P. L., Donelson, J. M. & Domingos, J. A. (2017). Potential for adaptation to climate change in a coral reef fish. *Global Change Biology* **23**, 307–317.

Naylor, R. L., Goldburg, R. J., Primavera, J. H. & Kautsky, N. (2000). Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies. *Nature* **405**, 1017–1024.

Nislow, K. H., Armstrong, J. D. & McKelvey, S. (2004). Phosphorus flux due to Atlantic salmon (*Salmo salar*) in an oligotrophic upland stream: effects of management and demography. *Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences* **61**, 2401–2410.

Olsson, P., Folke, C. & Hughes, T. P. (2008). Navigating the transition to ecosystem-based management of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **105**, 9489–9494.

Orr, J. C., Fabry, V. J., Aumont, O., Bopp, L., Doney, S. C., Feely, R. A., Gnanadesikan, A., Gruber, N., Ishida, A., Joos, F., Key, R. M., Lindsay, K., Maier-Reimer, E., Matear, R., Monfray, P., Mouchet, A., Najjar, R. G., Plattner, G., Rodgers, K. B., Sabine, C. L., Sarmiento, J. L., Schlitzer, R., Slater, R. D., Totterdell, I. J., Weirig, M., Yamanaka, Y. & Yool, A. (2005). Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying organisms. *Nature* **437**, 681–686.

Pardo, M. Á., Jiménez, E. & Pérez-Villarreal, B. (2016). Misdescription incidents in seafood sector. *Food Control* **62**, 277–283.
Paris, J. R., King, R. A. & Stevens, J. R. (2015). Human mining activity across the ages determines the genetic structure of modern brown trout (*Salmo trutta L.*) populations. *Evolutionary Applications* **8**, 573–585.

Paris, J. R., Sherman, K. D., Bell, E., Boulenger, C., Delord, C., El-Mahdi, M. B. M., Fairfield, E. A., Griffiths, A. M., Gutmann Roberts, C., Hedger, R. D., Holman, L. E., Hooper, L. H., Humphries, N. E., Katsiadaki, I., King, R. A., Lemopoulos, A., Payne, C. J., Peirson, G., Richter, K. K., Taylor, M. I., Trueman, C. N., Hayden, B. & Stevens, J. R. (2018). Understanding and managing fish populations: keeping the toolbox fit for purpose. *Journal of Fish Biology*.

Patrick, W. S. & Link, J. S. (2015). Myths that continue to impede progress in ecosystem-based fisheries management. *Fisheries* **40**, 155–160.

Pauly, D. & Zeller, D. (2016). Catch reconstructions reveal that global marine fisheries catches are higher than reported and declining. *Nature Communications* **7**, 10244. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10244

Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R. & Torres, F. (1998). Fishing down marine food webs. *Science* **279**, 860–863.

Pearson, W. H., Elston, R. A., Bienert, R. W., Drum, A. S. & Antrim, L. D. (1999). Why did the Prince William sound, Alaska, Pacific herring (*Clupea pallasi*) fisheries collapse in 1993 and 1994? Review of hypotheses. *Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science* **56**, 711–737.

Perkins, M. J., Ng, T. P., Dudgeon, D., Bonebrake, T. C. & Leung, K. M. (2015). Conserving intertidal habitats: what is the potential of ecological engineering to mitigate impacts of coastal structures? *Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science* **167**, 504–515.

Perry, A. L., Low, P. J., Ellis, J. R. & Reynolds, J. D. (2005). Climate change and distribution shifts in marine fishes. *Science* **308**, 1912–1915.

Pikitch, E. K., Santora, C., Babcock, E. A., Bakun, A., Bonfil, R., Conover, D. O., Dayton, P., Doukakis, P., Fluharty, D., Heneman, B., Houde, E. D., Link, J., Livingston, P. A., Mangel, M., McAllister, M. K., Pope, J. G. & Sainsbury, K. J. (2004). Ecosystem-based fishery management. *Science* **305**, 346–347.

Piou, C., Taylor, M. H., Papaïx, J. & Prevost, E. (2015). Modelling the interactive effects of selective fishing and environmental change on Atlantic salmon demogenetics. *Journal of Applied Ecology* **52**, 1629–1637.

Pittock, J., Finlayson, M., Arthington, A. H., Roux, D., Matthews, J. H., Biggs, H., Blom, E., Flitcroft, R., Froend, R., Harrison, I., Hermoso, V., Junk, W., Kumar, R., Linke, S., Nel, J., Nunes da Cunha, C., Pattnaik, A., Pollard, S., Rast, W., Thieme, M., Turak, E., Turpie, J., van Niekerk, L., Willems, D. & Viers, J. (2015). Managing freshwater, river, wetland and estuarine protected areas. In *Protected Area Governance and Management* (Worboys, G. L., Lockwood, M., Kothari, A., Feary, S. & Pulsford, I., eds), pp. 569–608. Canberra, A.C.T.: Australia National University Press.

Radford, A. N., Purser, J., Bruintjes, R., Voellmy, I. K., Everley, K. A., Wale, M. A., Holles, S. & Simpson, S. D. (2016). Beyond a simple effect: variable and changing responses to anthropogenic noise. In *The Effects of Noise on Aquatic Life II, Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology* (Popper, A. & Hawkins, A., eds), pp. 901–907. New York, NY: Springer.

Ramírez-Monsalve, P., Raakjær, J., Nielsen, K. N., Santiago, J. L., Ballesteros, M., Laksá, U. & Degnbol, P. (2016). Ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM) in the EU – current science-policy-society interfaces and emerging requirements. *Marine Policy* **66**, 83–92.

Reef Water Quality Protection Plan Secretariat. (2013). Reef water quality protection plan: securing the health and resilience of the great barrier reef world heritage area and adjacent catchments. Brisbane: government of Queensland. Available at www.reefplan.qld.gov.au/resources/assets/reef-plan-2013.pdf (last accessed on 12/11/2017).

Reynard, N. S., Kay, A. L., Anderson, M., Donovan, B. & Duckworth, C. (2017). The evolution of climate change guidance for fluvial flood risk management in England. *Progress in Physical Geography* **41**, 222–237.

Ricciardi, A. & Simberloff, D. (2009). Assisted colonization is not a viable conservation strategy. *Trends in Ecology and Evolution* **24**, 248–253.
Roberts, C. M., O'Leary, B. C., McCauley, D. J., Cury, P. M., Duarte, C. M., Lubchenco, J., Pauly, D., Sáenz-Arroyo, A., Sumaila, U. R., Wilson, R. W., Worm, B. & Castilla, J. C. (2017). Marine reserves can mitigate and promote adaptation to climate change. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **114**, 6167–6175.

Röcklinsberg, H. (2015). Fish consumption: choices in the intersection of public concern, fish welfare, food security, human health and climate change. *Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics* **28**, 533–551.

Rogers, A., Harborne, A. R., Brown, C. J., Bozec, Y., Castro, C., Chollett, I., Hock, K., Knowland, C. A., Marshall, A., Ortiz, J. C., Razak, T., Roff, G., Samper-Villarreal, J., Saunders, M. I., Wolff, N. H. & Mumby, P. J. (2015). Anticipative management for coral reef ecosystem services in the 21st century. *Global Change Biology* **21**, 504–514.

Rolls, R. J., Hayden, B. & Kahilainen, K. K. (2017). Conceptualising the interactive effects of climate change and biological invasions on subarctic freshwater fish. *Ecology and Evolution* **7**, 4109–4128.

Rose, K. A. (2000). Why are quantitative relationships between environmental quality and fish populations so elusive? *Ecological Applications* **10**, 367–385.

Ruckelshaus, M., Klinger, T., Knowlton, N. & DeMaster, D. P. (2008). Marine ecosystem-based management in practice: scientific and governance challenges. *Bioscience* **58**, 53–63.

Rush, S. & Solandt, J. L. (2017). Challenges on providing conservation advice for a growing network of English marine protected areas. *Marine Policy* **83**, 75–82.

Salvanes, A. G. V., Bartholomae, C., Yemane, D., Gibbons, M. J., Kainge, P., Krakstad, J. O., Rouault, M., Staby, A. & Sundby, S. (2015). Spatial dynamics of the bearded goby and its key fish predators off Namibia vary with climate and oxygen availability. *Fisheries Oceanography* **24**, 88–101.

Sbrocco, E. J. & Barber, P. H. (2013). MARSPEC: ocean climate layers for marine spatial ecology. *Ecology* **94**, 979.

Scheffer, B. M., Barrett, S., Carpenter, S. R., Folke, C., Green, A. J., Holmgren, M., Hughes, T. P., Kosten, S., van de Leemput, I. A., Nepstad, D. C., van Nes, E. H., Peeters, E. T. H. M. & Walker, B. (2015). Creating a safe operating space for iconic ecosystems. *Science* **347**, 1317–1320.

Selkoe, K. A., Henzler, C. M. & Gaines, S. D. (2008). Seascape genetics and the spatial ecology of marine populations. *Fish & Fisheries* **9**, 363–377.

Sheahan, D. A., Brighty, G. C., Daniel, M., Jobling, S., Harries, J. E., Hurst, M. R., Kennedy, J., Kirby, S. J., Morris, S., Routledge, E. J., Sumpter, J. P. & Waldock, M. J. (2002). Reduction in the estrogenic activity of a treated sewage effluent discharge to an English river as a result of a decrease in the concentration of industrially derived surfactants. *Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry* **21**, 515–519.

Sibly, R. M., Grimm, V., Martin, B. T., Johnston, A. S. A., Kułakowska, K., Topping, C. J., Calow, P., Nabe-Nielsen, J., Thorbek, P. & DeAngelis, D. L. (2013). Representing the acquisition and use of energy by individuals in agent-based models of animal populations. *Methods in Ecology and Evolution* **4**, 151–161.

Simpson, S. D., Jennings, S., Johnson, M. P., Blanchard, J. L., Schön, P. J., Sims, D. W. & Genner, M. J. (2011a). Continental shelf-wide response of a fish assemblage to rapid warming of the sea. *Current Biology* **21**, 1565–1570.

Simpson, S. D., Munday, P. L., Wittenrich, M. L., Manassa, R., Dixson, D. L., Gagliano, M. & Yan, H. Y. (2011b). Ocean acidification erodes crucial auditory behaviour in a marine fish. *Biology Letters* **7**, 917–920.

Simpson, S. D., Radford, A. N., Nedelec, S. L., Ferrari, M. C. O., Chivers, D. P., McCormick, M. I. & Meekan, M. G. (2016). Anthropogenic noise increases fish mortality by predation. *Nature Communications* **7**, 10544. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10544

Slabbekoorn, H., Bouton, N., van Opzeeland, I., Coers, A., ten Cate, C. & Popper, A. N. (2010). A noisy spring: the impact of globally rising underwater sound levels on fish. *Trends in Ecology and Evolution* **25**, 419–427.

Smith, V. H., Tilman, G. D. & Nekola, J. C. (1999). Eutrophication: impacts of excess nutrient inputs on freshwater, marine, and terrestrial ecosystems. *Environmental Pollution* **100**, 179–196.
Song, A. M., Scholtens, J., Stephen, J., Bavinck, M. & Chuenpagdee, R. (2017). Transboundary research in fisheries. *Marine Policy* **76**, 8–18.

Soranno, P. A. & Schimel, D. S. (2014). Macrosystems ecology: big data, big ecology. *Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment* **12**, 5–14.

Stevens, C. H., Croft, D. P., Paull, G. C. & Tyler, C. R. (2017). Stress and welfare in ornamental fishes: what can be learned from aquaculture? *Journal of Fish Biology* **91**, 409–428.

Stevenson, T. J., Visser, M. E., Arnold, W., Barrett, P., Biello, S., Dawson, A., Denlinger, D. L., Dominoni, D., Ebling, F. J., Elton, S., Evans, N., Ferguson, H. M., Foster, R. G., Hau, M., Haydon, D. T., Hazlerigg, D. G., Heideman, P., Hopcraft, J. G. C., Jonsson, N. N., Kronfeld-Schor, N., Kumar, V., Lincoln, G. A., MacLeod, R., Martin, S. A. M., Martinez-Bakker, M., Nelson, R. J., Reed, T., Robinson, J. E., Rock, D., Schwartz, W. J., Steffan-Dewenter, I., Tauber, E., Thackeray, S. J., Umstatter, C., Yoshimura, T. & Helm, B. (2015). Disrupted seasonal biology impacts health, food security and ecosystems. *Proceedings of the Royal Society B* **282**, 20151453. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.1453

Stiasny, M. H., Mittermayer, F. H., Sswat, M., Voss, R., Jutfelt, F., Chierici, M., Puvanendran, V., Mortensen, A., Reusch, T. B. H. & Clemmesen, C. (2016). Ocean acidification effects on Atlantic cod larval survival and recruitment to the fished population. *PLoS ONE* **11**, e0155448. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155448

Stramma, L., Prince, E. D., Schmidtko, S., Luo, J., Hoolihan, J. P., Visbeck, M., Wallace, D. W. R., Brandt, P. & Körtzinger, A. (2012). Expansion of oxygen minimum zones may reduce available habitat for tropical pelagic fishes. *Nature Climate Change* **2**, 33–37.

Strayer, D. L. & Dudgeon, D. (2010). Freshwater biodiversity conservation: recent progress and future challenges. *Journal of the North American Benthological Society* **29**, 344–358.

Sutherland, W. J., Armstrong-Brown, S., Armsworth, P. R., Brereton, T., Brickland, J., Campbell, C. D., Chamberlain, D. E., Cooke, A. I., Dulvy, N. K., Dusic, N. R., Fitton, M., Freckleton, R. P., Godfray, C. J., Grout, N., Harvey, H. J., Hedley, C., Hopkins, J. J., Kift, N. B., Kirby, J., Kunin, W. E., Macdonald, D. W., Marker, B., Naura, M., Neale, A. R., Oliver, T., Osborn, D., Pullin, A. S., Shardlow, M. E. A., Showler, D. A., Smith, P. L., Smithers, R. J., Solandt, J. L., Spencer, J., Spray, C. J., Thomas, C. D., Thompson, J., Webb, S. E., Yalden, D. W. & Watkinson, A. R. (2006). The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK. *Journal of Applied Ecology* **43**, 617–627.

Teh, L. S. L., Witter, A., Cheung, W. W. L., Sumaila, U. R. & Yin, X. (2017). What is at stake? Status and threats to South China Sea marine fisheries. *Ambio* **46**, 57–72.

Thorne, R. E. & Thomas, G. L. (2008). Herring and the “Exxon Valdez” oil spill: an investigation into historical data conflicts. *ICES Journal of Marine Science* **65**, 44–50.

Tix, J. A., Hasler, C. T., Sullivan, C., Jeffrey, J. D. & Suski, C. D. (2017). Elevated carbon dioxide has the potential to impact alarm cue responses in some freshwater fishes. *Aquatic Ecology* **51**, 59–72.

Tornero, V. & Hanke, G. (2016). Chemical contaminants entering the marine environment from sea-based sources: a review with a focus on European seas. *Marine Pollution Bulletin* **112**, 17–38.

Townhill, B. L., Pinnegar, J. K., Righton, D. A. & Metcalfe, J. D. (2017). Fisheries, low oxygen and climate change: how much do we really know? *Journal of Fish Biology* **90**, 723–750.

Tzadik, O. E., Curtis, J. S., Granneman, J. E., Kurth, B. N., Pusack, T. J., Wallace, A. A., Hollander, D. J., Peebles, E. B. & Stallings, C. D. (2017). Chemical archives in fishes beyond otoliths: a review on the use of other body parts as chronological recorders of microchemical constituents for expanding interpretations of environmental, ecological, and life-history changes. *Limnology and Oceanography Methods* **15**, 238–263.

United Nations (2017). World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP/248. New York, NY: UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Available at www.esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Publications/Files/WPP2017_KeyFindings.pdf

Uren Webster, T. M., Bury, N., van Aerle, R. & Santos, E. M. (2013). Global transcriptome profiling reveals molecular mechanisms of metal tolerance in a chronically exposed wild population of brown trout. *Environmental Science and Technology* **47**, 8869–8877.
Uusi-Heikkilä, S., Sävilammi, T., Leder, E., Arlinghaus, R. & Primmer, C. R. (2017). Rapid, broad-scale gene expression evolution in experimentally harvested fish populations. *Molecular Ecology* **26**, 3954–3967.

Valentini, A., Taberlet, P., Miaud, C., Civade, R., Herder, J., Thomson, P. F., Bellemain, E., Besnard, A., Coissac, E., Boyer, F., Gaboriaud, C., Jean, P., Poulet, N., Roset, N., Copp, G. H., Geniez, P., Pont, D., Argillier, C., Baudoin, J., Peroux, T., Crivelli, A. J., Olivier, A., Acqueberge, M., Le Brun, M., Møller, P. R., Willerslev, E. & Dejean, T. (2016). Next-generation monitoring of aquatic biodiversity using environmental DNA metabarcoding. *Molecular Ecology* **33**, 929–942.

Valenzuela-Quiñonez, F. (2016). How fisheries management can benefit from genomics? *Brief-ings in Functional Genomics* **15**, 352–357.

Valiela, I., Bowen, J. L. & York, J. K. (2001). Mangrove forests: one of the world's threatened major tropical environments. *Bioscience* **51**, 807–815.

Wagner, M., Scherer, C., Alvarez-Muñoz, D., Brennholt, N., Bourrain, X., Buchinger, S., Fries, E., Grosbois, C., Klasmeier, J., Marti, T., Rodriguez-Mozaz, S., Urbatzka, R., Vethaak, A. D., Winther-Nielsen, M. & Reifferscheid, G. (2014). Microplastics in freshwater ecosystems: what we know and what we need to know. *Environmental Sciences Europe* **26**, 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-014-0012-7

Waters, C. N., Zalasiewicz, J., Summerhayes, C., Barnosky, A. D., Poirier, C., Galuszka, A., Cearrata, A., Edgeworth, M., Ellis, E. C., Ellis, M., Jeandel, C., Leinfelder, R., McNeill, J. R., Richter, D., Steffen, W., Syvitski, J., Vidas, D., Wagreich, M., Williams, M., Zhisheng, A., Grinevald, J., Odada, E., Oreskes, N. & Wolfe, A. P. (2016). The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene. *Science* **351**, aad2622. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad2622

Waycott, M., Duarte, C. M., Carruthers, T. J. B., Orth, R. J., Dennison, W. C., Olyarnik, S., Calladine, A., Fourqurean, J. W., Heck, K. L., Hughes, A. R., Kendrick, G. A., Kenworthy, W. J., Short, F. T. & Williams, S. L. (2009). Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **106**, 12377–12381.

Webb, A. J., Arthington, A. H. & Olden, J. D. (2017). Models of ecological responses to flow regime change to inform environmental flow assessments. In *Water for the Environment: Policy, Science, and Integrated Management* (Horne, A., Webb, A., Stewardson, M., Richter, B. & Acreman, M., eds). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Whitehead, A. (2013). Interactions between oil-spill pollutants and natural stressors can compound ecotoxicological effects. *Integrative and Comparative Biology* **53**, 635–647.

Wiber, M., Charles, A., Kearney, J. & Berkes, F. (2009). Enhancing community empowerment through participatory fisheries research. *Marine Policy* **22**, 172–179.

Windsor, F. M., Ormerod, S. J. & Tyler, C. R. (2018). Endocrine disruption in aquatic systems: up-scaling research to address ecological consequences. *Biological Reviews* **93**, 626–641. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12360

Winemiller, K. O., McIntyre, P. B., Castello, L., Fluet-Chouinard, E., Giarrizzo, T., Nam, S., Baird, I. G., Darwall, W., Lujan, N. K., Harrison, I., Stiassny, M. L. J., Silvano, R. A. M., Fitzgerald, D. B., Pelicice, F. M., Agostinho, A. A., Gomes, L. C., Albert, J. S., Baran, E., Petrere, M. Jr., Zarfl, C., Mulligan, M., Sullivan, J. P., Arantes, C. C., Sousa, L. M., Koning, A. A., Hoeinghaus, D. J., Sabaj, M., Lundberg, J. G., Armbruster, J., Thieme, M. L., Petry, P., Zuanon, J., Vilara, G. T., Snoeks, J., Ou, C., Rainboth, W., Pavanelli, C. S., Akama, A., van Soesbergen, A. & Saenz, L. (2016) Balancing hydropower and biodiversity in the Amazon, Congo, and Mekong. *Science* **351**, 128–129.

Woodward, G., Perkins, D. M. & Brown, L. E. (2010). Climate change and freshwater ecosystems: impacts across multiple levels of organization. *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B* **365**, 2093–2106.

Worm, B., Barbier, E. B., Beaumont, N., Duffy, E., Folke, C., Halpern, B. S., Jackson, J. B. C., Lotze, H. K., Micheli, F., Palumbi, S. R., Sala, E., Selkoe, K. A., Stachowicz, J. J. & Watson, R. (2006). Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. *Science* **314**, 787–791.

Yeager, L. A., Marchand, P., Gill, D. A., Baum, J. K. & McPherson, J. M. (2017). MSEC: queryable global layers of environmental and anthropogenic variables for marine ecosystem studies. *Ecology* **98**, 1976.
Young, H. S., McCauley, D. J., Galetti, M. & Dirzo, R. (2016). Patterns, causes, and consequences of Anthropocene defaunation. *Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systems* **47**, 333–358.

Ziv, G., Baran, E., Nam, S., Rodríguez-Iturbe, I. & Levin, S. A. (2012). Trading-off fish bio-diversity, food security, and hydropower in the Mekong River basin. *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America* **109**, 5609–5614.