By Natasha R. Serrao, Prateep Kumar Nayak, Jason Rae, Derek Armitage, Simon C. Courtenay, and Chris C. Wilson

This Plain Language Summary is published in advance of the paper discussed. Please check back soon for a link to the full paper.

A keystone species is one who has a high impact on an ecological or a human community, despite having a low abundance. Even though the “keystone” term has been used widely within the literature, there is a limited understanding of how the term is defined, measured, or applied within aquatic systems. Identifying and prioritizing the conservation of keystone species has been previously suggested to conserve the ecosystem because of the protection afforded to other species.

This paper summarizes uses and knowledge gaps associated with different approaches to applying keystone species concepts to fish and fisheries by taking a systematic scoping review approach. To achieve this, we analyzed 74 articles in peer-reviewed journals that measured keystone status within the context of fish and fisheries.

Key findings from this study revealed that ecological dimensions have been applied more than cultural dimensions within the fish and fisheries context. Across all the literature that encompasses “keystone” and aquatic “fish”, only 13% of studies test its designation. Within the ecological context, there is a specific framework that is followed to designate keystone status; this is referred to as ecosystem dynamic modelling.

We suggest that keystone species designation should be properly described and defined, and that moving forward, both social and ecological dimensions should be included when examining keystone status. If economic, sustenance, historical dimensions, and cultural significance were considered when designating keystones, this would provide a stronger application of this term.