Comparison of ground‐based and UAV a‐UHF artificial tracer mobility monitoring methods on a braided river

Abstract

Radio frequency identification (RFID) technologies, which allow wireless detection of individual buried or immersed tracers, represent a step forward in sediment tracking, especially passive integrated transponders (PIT tags) that have been widely used. Despite their widespread adoption in the scientific community, they typically have low efficiency when deployed in river systems with active bedload transport or deep wet channels, attributed to their technical specifications. A recent evaluation of active ultra‐high frequency transponders (a‐UHF tags) assessed their larger detection range and provided a methodology for their geopositioning. In this study, we test five different survey methods (one including an unmanned aerial vehicle [UAV]) in a sediment tracking study, and compare them in terms of recovery rate, field effort, geopositioning error, and efficiency. We then tested the method on a larger reach following a Q5 flood and performed cross‐comparisons between active and passive RFIDs. The results confirmed that the a‐UHF RFID technology allowed rapid (1.5 h ha−1) survey of a large area (<34 ha) of emerged bars and shallow water channels with recovery of a high percentage of tracers (72%) that had travelled large distances (mean ≈ 1000 m; max ≈ 3400 m). Moreover, the tracers were identified with low geopositioning error (mean ≈ 7.1 m, ≤1% of their travel distance). We also showed that a UAV‐based survey was fast (0.38 h ha−1), efficient (recovery rate = 84%), and low error (mean ≈ 4.2 m). Thus, a‐UHF RFID technology permits the development of a variety of survey methods, depending on the study objectives and the human and financial resources available. This allows field efforts to be optimized by determining an appropriate balance between the high equipment cost of a‐UHF tracers and the resulting reduced survey costs. © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Remotely sensed rivers in the Anthropocene: state of the art and prospects

“…As a consequence of these key technological advances, published papers on the use of UAVs in river settings have appeared at an accelerated pace with a Google Scholar search for keywords 'UAV River' returning over 9000 items published since 2015. Drones are now equipped with LiDAR sensors, multi-and hyper-spectral sensors and even RFID tracking technology (Cassel et al, 2019).…”

The e-RFIDuino: An Arduino-based RFID environmental station to monitor mobile tags

“…The choice of one tracking technique depends on the users' study objectives, and is determined by a set of factors including data requirements, costs (equipment and follow-up), experiment duration, and the characteristics (e.g. water depth, velocity, total area concerned) of the studied site [8]. Recent investigations in river bedload transport and coarse sediment tracking using active ultra-high frequency transponders (hereinafter referred to as a-UHF tags) have led to substantial technical and methodological developments, including the surveying of tracked objects by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) [8].These developments have profited from three properties of the a-UHF RFID system [9]:…”

“…water depth, velocity, total area concerned) of the studied site [8]. Recent investigations in river bedload transport and coarse sediment tracking using active ultra-high frequency transponders (hereinafter referred to as a-UHF tags) have led to substantial technical and methodological developments, including the surveying of tracked objects by unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) [8].These developments have profited from three properties of the a-UHF RFID system [9]:…”

Advanced methods to investigate hydro‐morphological processes in open‐water environments

“…However, in river systems with active bedload transport or large water depth, low efficiency is often achieved as a result of the technical specifications. In their study, Cassel et al (2020) deploy active ultra‐high‐frequency transponders (a‐UHF tags) in combination with five different survey methods to investigate these combinations with respect to recovery rate, field effort, geopositioning error and efficiency. The results show that this a‐UHF RFID technology allows rapid surveys over large areas, including emerged bars and shallow water channels, with a high percentage of recovery of tracers in combination with a low geopositioning error.…”