Environmental influence on transmitter detection probability in biotelemetry: developing a general model of acoustic transmission

Gjelland, Karl Øystein; Hedger, Richard D.

doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12057

Cited by 93 publications

(122 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This detection range is in the range of previous reports, which encompass both higher (Hobday & Pincock, 2011;Huveneers et al, 2016) and similar range values (Welsh et al, 2012;Cagua et al, 2013, Stocks et al, 2014. Some other publications have reported a broad range of distances within the same study (How & de Lestang, 2012;Cagua et al, 2013;Gjelland & Hedger, 2013). Although the detection ranges differ extensively between the cited studies, they all concluded that detection range strongly depends upon meteorological and oceanographic environmental variables, on sediment characteristics and on the environment's topographic complexity factors which all influence sound propagation in water.…”

Section: Variables Influencing Detection Probabilitysupporting

confidence: 79%

“…It was mainly influenced by noise and wind speed in relation to distance, the interaction between tilt and azimuth, and current speed, which is in agreement with Gjelland & Hedger (2013) and Huveneers et al (2016). In contrast, Stocks et al (2014) listed wave height as the principal factor affecting detection range.…”

Section: Variables Influencing Detection Probabilitysupporting

confidence: 73%

“…The influence of wind can be attributed to both the noise generation itself and to the air bubbles that are mixed into the water column (Gjelland & Hedger, 2013). Scattering of signals in strongly wind-influenced surface layers will, due to air bubbles (Medwin & Clay, 1998) and multipath (Dol et al, 2013), not only increase the sound attenuation in these layers, but also contribute to increased background noise levels, even at larger depth.…”

Section: Variables Influencing Detection Probabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although acoustic telemetry is a cost-and labourefficient method able to generate extensive datasets in a short time period, it also suffers some limitations (Hobday & Pincock, 2011;Gjelland & Hedger, 2013;Kessel et al, 2014) which are often less understood or not taken into account. The most important limitation is related to the ability of a receiver to detect the signals from tagged animals in its vicinity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a consequence, the successful application of acoustic telemetry and the correct interpretation of detection and movement data depend upon proper knowledge of the detection range (i.e. the relationship between detection probability and the distance between the receiver and tag) (Gjelland & Hedger, 2013;Kessel et al, 2014). It is therefore important to know the environment one is working in and the factors that could influence the applicability of the technique.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Environmental factors influence the detection probability in acoustic telemetry in a marine environment: results from a new setup

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic telemetry is a commonly applied method to investigate the ecology of marine animals and provides a scientific basis for management and conservation. Crucial insight in animal behaviour and ecosystem functioning and dynamics is gained through acoustic receiver networks that are established in many different environments around the globe. The main limitation to this technique is the ability of the receivers to detect the signals from tagged animals present in the nearby area. To interpret acoustic data correctly, understanding influencing factors on the detection probability is critical. Therefore, range test studies are an essential part of acoustic telemetry research. Here, we investigated whether specific environmental factors (i.e. wind, currents, waves, background noise, receiver tilt and azimuth) influence the receiver detection probability for a permanent acoustic receiver network in Belgium. Noise and wind speed in relation to distance, the interaction of receiver tilt and azimuth and current speed were the most influential variables affecting the detection probability in this environment. The study indicated that there is high detection probability up to a distance of circa 200 m. A new setup, making use of features that render valuable information for data analysis and interpretation, was tested and revealed general applicability.

show abstract

Section: Variables Influencing Detection Probabilitysupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Variables Influencing Detection Probabilitysupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Variables Influencing Detection Probabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Environmental factors influence the detection probability in acoustic telemetry in a marine environment: results from a new setup

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Can you hear me now? Range‐testing a submerged passive acoustic receiver array in a Caribbean coral reef habitat

Selby

Hart

Fujisaki

et al. 2016

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Submerged passive acoustic technology allows researchers to investigate spatial and temporal movement patterns of many marine and freshwater species. The technology uses receivers to detect and record acoustic transmissions emitted from tags attached to an individual. Acoustic signal strength naturally attenuates over distance, but numerous environmental variables also affect the probability a tag is detected. Knowledge of receiver range is crucial for designing acoustic arrays and analyzing telemetry data. Here, we present a method for testing a relatively large‐scale receiver array in a dynamic Caribbean coastal environment intended for long‐term monitoring of multiple species. The U.S. Geological Survey and several academic institutions in collaboration with resource management at Buck Island Reef National Monument (BIRNM), off the coast of St. Croix, recently deployed a 52 passive acoustic receiver array. We targeted 19 array‐representative receivers for range‐testing by submersing fixed delay interval range‐testing tags at various distance intervals in each cardinal direction from a receiver for a minimum of an hour. Using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), we estimated the probability of detection across the array and assessed the effect of water depth, habitat, wind, temperature, and time of day on the probability of detection. The predicted probability of detection across the entire array at 100 m distance from a receiver was 58.2% (95% CI: 44.0–73.0%) and dropped to 26.0% (95% CI: 11.4–39.3%) 200 m from a receiver indicating a somewhat constrained effective detection range. Detection probability varied across habitat classes with the greatest effective detection range occurring in homogenous sand substrate and the smallest in high rugosity reef. Predicted probability of detection across BIRNM highlights potential gaps in coverage using the current array as well as limitations of passive acoustic technology within a complex coral reef environment.

show abstract

Foraging intensity of wild mulloway Argyrosomus japonicus decreases with increasing anthropogenic disturbance

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental influence on transmitter detection probability in biotelemetry: developing a general model of acoustic transmission

Cited by 93 publications

References 20 publications

Environmental factors influence the detection probability in acoustic telemetry in a marine environment: results from a new setup

Environmental factors influence the detection probability in acoustic telemetry in a marine environment: results from a new setup

Can you hear me now? Range‐testing a submerged passive acoustic receiver array in a Caribbean coral reef habitat

Foraging intensity of wild mulloway Argyrosomus japonicus decreases with increasing anthropogenic disturbance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About