Understanding which species are most vulnerable to human impacts is a prerequisite for designing effective conservation strategies. Surveys of terrestrial species have suggested that largebodied species and top predators are the most at risk, and it is commonly assumed that such patterns also apply in the ocean. However, there has been no global test of this hypothesis in the sea. We analyzed two fisheries datasets (stock assessments and landings) to determine the life-history traits of species that have suffered dramatic population collapses. Contrary to expectations, our data suggest that up to twice as many fisheries for small, low trophic-level species have collapsed compared with those for large predators. These patterns contrast with those on land, suggesting fundamental differences in the ways that industrial fisheries and land conversion affect natural communities. Even temporary collapses of small, low trophic-level fishes can have ecosystem-wide impacts by reducing food supply to larger fish, seabirds, and marine mammals.body size | ecosystem-based management | food webs | life-history theory | marine conservation O verfishing is one of the most serious conservation concerns in marine ecosystems (1), but understanding which species are most at risk remains a challenge. On land, life-history traits are strong predictors of extinction risk (2), and vulnerable species often have large body size and high trophic level (2, 3). In marine ecosystems, the well-publicized declines of large predatory fishes (4, 5) suggest that similar trends may also be common in the sea. However, research to date has found or proposed a wide range of life-history characteristics that cause high vulnerability, including large body size (6-9), late maturity (6, 9), long lifespan (6, 8-11), low fecundity and high parental investment in offspring (11, 12), or high trophic level (2, 13). Understanding which traits, or combinations of traits, are most useful for predicting vulnerability has been difficult because analyses have been limited to regional comparisons or narrow species groups, and because reliable global data have not been available to more broadly test which types of fishes are most likely to suffer fisheries collapse.In addition, there are reasons to believe that regional or terrestrial life-history trends might not apply globally in the ocean. For example, fishery biologists often recommend higher harvest rates for fast-growing, highly productive species, and lower harvest rates for species with lower productivity (14). Where implemented, these adjustments might reduce the resilience of fastgrowing species and put all harvested species at similar risks of decline. In addition, economic forces or management regime may be more important than life history in determining whether fishing effort is successfully controlled (15,16). Small pelagic species, although often possessing a rapid growth rate, are also highly catchable, and therefore susceptible to overfishing (17). Finally, the conflict with human development that is ...