Acoustic telemetry and accelerometers: a field comparison of different proxies for activity in the marine environment

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pereñíguez, J. M.
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Venerus, L. A., Gutiérrez-Cánovas, C., Abecasis, David, Ciancio, J. E., Jiménez-Montalbán, P., García-Charton, J. A.
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