Table 1.
Ecological indicators used as response variables in gradient forest analysis.
Table 2.
Environmental factors used as pressure variables in gradient forest analysis.
Table 3.
Mean and range of model performance by ecological indicator, .
Fig 1.
Importance of environmental and anthropogenic pressure variables weighted across ecological indicator outputs.
EXP, exploitation; EXP_1, 1-yr lagged exploitation; LANDINGS_1, 1-yr lagged landings (t); LANDINGS, landings (t); SST, sea surface temperature (°C); NAO_w, winter North Atlantic Oscillation Index; AMO_a, mean annual Atlantic multi-decadal oscillation index; PRECIP, precipitation.
Fig 2.
Cumulative shifts (in R2 units) of ecological indicator value across the gradient of environmental and anthropogenic pressure variables.
Each plot is scaled to the maximum cumulative response to allow for direct comparison of ecological indicator response to each pressure variable. Ecological indicator abbreviations are listed in Table 3.
Fig 3.
Cumulative shifts (in R2 units) of aggregate ecological indicator response across the gradient for each environmental and anthropogenic pressure variable.
Common scale allows for the direct comparison ecosystem response across pressure variables.
Fig 4.
Threshold shifts in the value of aggregated ecological indicators along the gradient of environmental and anthropogenic pressure variables and reflect a rate of change in ecosystem processes.
Binned raw importance of splits from random forests for ecological indicator value relative to the pressure variable on the horizontal axis. Density plots (lines) illustrate the estimated importance or turnover rate at any given pressure value, which is estimated as the ratio of the density of split importance to the density of observed predictor values along the predictor gradient. The dashed line indicates where the ratio is 1. Ratios > 1 indicate locations of relatively greater change in community composition, such that peaks in the density plot indicate threshold values for each environmental predictor where ecosystem status is expected to shift.
Fig 5.
Biplot of the first two principal components display the coordinate positions and connecting segments for each year and indicating inferred compositional patterns.
Environmental and anthropogenic pressure variables used in the analysis displayed as vectors.