Table 4. Model predictions that show the response of the entire community when the management strategy oriented to reduce carnivore bycatch (CBC) is reinforced. Parentheses indicate the proportion of models from the same seascape that suggest the specified response. Example (in bold): Omnivore Bycatch ↓(2/3)- ↓* (1/3) = Two out of three positive predictions were significant and one out of three were not significant (*). NA = Scenarios where this indicator is not present in the system. ↑= Positive prediction (suggesting an increase in the group abundance); ↓= Negative prediction (suggesting a decrease in the group abundance); 0 = No change.

Fishing seascape Mouth Wetland Shoreline Shallow lagoon Lagoon Islands/ channel
Indicators Biological resources predictions
Crustaceans (Cr) (3/3) (2/2) (3/3) (2/2) NA NA
Mollusks bycatch (MBC) (3/3) NA (3/3) (2/2) (2/2) (2/2)
Omnivore fishes (OF) NA (2/2) (3/3) ↑*(2/2) 0 (2/2) (2/2)
Omnivore bycatch (OBC) NA (1/2)-↓*(1/2) (2/3)–↓*(1/3) (2/2) (2/2) NA
Carnivore fishes (CF) ↑*(1/3)–0(2/3) NA NA ↓*(2/2) 0 (2/2) (2/2)
Sea turtle bycatch (ST) (3/3) NA NA NA (2/2) NA
Fishing gears predictions
Shrimp net (SN) (1/1) (1/1) (1/1) NA NA NA
Gillnets (GN) 0 (1/1) (1/1) (1/1) 0 (1/1) 0 (1/1) 0 (1/1)
Encircling gillnet (EG) NA NA NA NA 0 (1/1) (1/1)