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

Thumbnail Image
Files
Pereñíguez et al 2022.pdf(5.18 MB)
Date
2022-11-11
relationships.isAuthorOfPublication
Profile Picture
Person
Profile Picture
Person
relationships.isSecondaryAuthorOf
relationships.isDirectorOf
Authors
Venerus, L. A. ; Abecasis, D. ; Ciancio, J. E. ; Gutiérrez Cánovas, C. ; Jiménez Montalbán, Pedro Javier ; García Charton, José Antonio ; Pereñíguez López, José Manuel
item.page.secondaryauthor
item.page.director
Publisher
Oxford University Press
publication.page.editor
publication.page.department
Ecología e Hidrología
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsac190
item.page.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Description
Abstract
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.
publication.page.subject
Animal movement , Behaviour interpretation , Biologging , Detection frecuency , Fish behaviour , Activity inference
Citation
ICES Journal of Marine Science, 2022, Vol. 79, Issue 10, pp. 2600–2613
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10201/190029
item.page.embargo
Collections
Artículos
Ir a Estadísticas