Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/18928 |
Resumo: | Different proxies for activity are used in the field of acoustic telemetry, a leading technology for the study of behaviour in the aquatic environment. Acoustic telemetry poses some shortcomings that may condition data interpretation. Here, we assessed some approaches commonly used to infer activity from acoustic telemetry data using acceleration biologgers as a benchmark. Specifically, we assessed (1) the performance of internal acceleration transmitters, (2) the consequences of averaging acceleration data into increasing time bins, (3) the occurrence of sampling bias in telemetry data acquisition, and (4) the performance of the number of detections and the depth range as proxies for activity. Despite some constraints of acoustic telemetry, acceleration transmitters had a good performance. Conversely, the number of detections and the depth range did not match well the activity estimates provided by acceleration biologgers. Besides, our results pointed to some issues in models concerning the predictive power of acceleration transmitters (linear predictor) over acceleration biologgers, warned about potential sampling bias associated with data acquisition with acoustic telemetry, and highlighted the relevance of considering inter-individual differences in behavioural studies. Finally, we provided some methodological perspectives that should be considered to plan fieldwork, analyse data, and interpret results on animal activity obtained with acoustic telemetry. |
id |
RCAP_714386d830081401b2fa1e26d61f829e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:sapientia.ualg.pt:10400.1/18928 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environmentActivity inferenceAnimal movementBehaviour interpretationBiologgingDetection frequencyFish behaviourDifferent proxies for activity are used in the field of acoustic telemetry, a leading technology for the study of behaviour in the aquatic environment. Acoustic telemetry poses some shortcomings that may condition data interpretation. Here, we assessed some approaches commonly used to infer activity from acoustic telemetry data using acceleration biologgers as a benchmark. Specifically, we assessed (1) the performance of internal acceleration transmitters, (2) the consequences of averaging acceleration data into increasing time bins, (3) the occurrence of sampling bias in telemetry data acquisition, and (4) the performance of the number of detections and the depth range as proxies for activity. Despite some constraints of acoustic telemetry, acceleration transmitters had a good performance. Conversely, the number of detections and the depth range did not match well the activity estimates provided by acceleration biologgers. Besides, our results pointed to some issues in models concerning the predictive power of acceleration transmitters (linear predictor) over acceleration biologgers, warned about potential sampling bias associated with data acquisition with acoustic telemetry, and highlighted the relevance of considering inter-individual differences in behavioural studies. Finally, we provided some methodological perspectives that should be considered to plan fieldwork, analyse data, and interpret results on animal activity obtained with acoustic telemetry.CGL2013-49039-RDL57/2016/CP1361/CT0036IJC2018-036642-IOxford university pressSapientiaPereñíguez, J. M.Venerus, L. A.Gutiérrez-Cánovas, C.Abecasis, DavidCiancio, J. E.Jiménez-Montalbán, P.García-Charton, J. A.2023-01-25T14:21:39Z2022-122022-12-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/18928eng10.1093/icesjms/fsac1901095-9289info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-24T10:31:17Zoai:sapientia.ualg.pt:10400.1/18928Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T20:08:37.236015Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment |
title |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment |
spellingShingle |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment Pereñíguez, J. M. Activity inference Animal movement Behaviour interpretation Biologging Detection frequency Fish behaviour |
title_short |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment |
title_full |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment |
title_fullStr |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment |
title_full_unstemmed |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment |
title_sort |
Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment |
author |
Pereñíguez, J. M. |
author_facet |
Pereñíguez, J. M. Venerus, L. A. Gutiérrez-Cánovas, C. Abecasis, David Ciancio, J. E. Jiménez-Montalbán, P. García-Charton, J. A. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Venerus, L. A. Gutiérrez-Cánovas, C. Abecasis, David Ciancio, J. E. Jiménez-Montalbán, P. García-Charton, J. A. |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Sapientia |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pereñíguez, J. M. Venerus, L. A. Gutiérrez-Cánovas, C. Abecasis, David Ciancio, J. E. Jiménez-Montalbán, P. García-Charton, J. A. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Activity inference Animal movement Behaviour interpretation Biologging Detection frequency Fish behaviour |
topic |
Activity inference Animal movement Behaviour interpretation Biologging Detection frequency Fish behaviour |
description |
Different proxies for activity are used in the field of acoustic telemetry, a leading technology for the study of behaviour in the aquatic environment. Acoustic telemetry poses some shortcomings that may condition data interpretation. Here, we assessed some approaches commonly used to infer activity from acoustic telemetry data using acceleration biologgers as a benchmark. Specifically, we assessed (1) the performance of internal acceleration transmitters, (2) the consequences of averaging acceleration data into increasing time bins, (3) the occurrence of sampling bias in telemetry data acquisition, and (4) the performance of the number of detections and the depth range as proxies for activity. Despite some constraints of acoustic telemetry, acceleration transmitters had a good performance. Conversely, the number of detections and the depth range did not match well the activity estimates provided by acceleration biologgers. Besides, our results pointed to some issues in models concerning the predictive power of acceleration transmitters (linear predictor) over acceleration biologgers, warned about potential sampling bias associated with data acquisition with acoustic telemetry, and highlighted the relevance of considering inter-individual differences in behavioural studies. Finally, we provided some methodological perspectives that should be considered to plan fieldwork, analyse data, and interpret results on animal activity obtained with acoustic telemetry. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-12 2022-12-01T00:00:00Z 2023-01-25T14:21:39Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/18928 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.1/18928 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1093/icesjms/fsac190 1095-9289 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Oxford university press |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Oxford university press |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799133332466827264 |