MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567849840 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12726

Evaluation of an acoustic telemetry transmitter designed to identify predation events

2017· article· en· W2567849840 on OpenAlexafffund
Edmund A. Halfyard, Dale M. Webber, Joshua Del Papa, Todd A. Leadley, Steven T. Kessel, Scott F. Colborne, Aaron T. Fisk

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsVemco (Canada)University of Windsor
FundersMitacs
KeywordsPredationTelemetryBiologyPerchBass (fish)PredatorMicropterusRainbow troutFisheryEcologyZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>Computer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary The field of acoustic telemetry has evolved rapidly and now permits the remote sensing of animal behaviour, movement, physiology and survival in environments, and species not previously possible. However, an inability to detect when a telemetered animal is consumed by a predator can complicate accurate interpretation of the telemetry data. In this paper, we describe the efforts taken to test the two generations of a novel prototype acoustic telemetry transmitter designed specifically to detect predation. Testing involved either staged predation events where tagged prey (Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss and Yellow Perch Perca flavescens ) were fed to captive Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides , or false‐positive testing where prey fish were tagged and held without the risk of predation. Metrics of interest were (i) the rate of correctly identifying the predation events, (ii) signal lag (i.e. the time required to detect a predation event), (iii) tag retention time in the predator's gut, and (iv) the rate of false‐positive triggering in both live and dead prey fishes. Staged predation events were successfully identified in 61/65 and 52/55 trials for generation 1 and 2 tags, respectively. Signal lag time was reduced in generation 1 tags (generally between 1 and 9 h) relative to generation 2 (3–29 h); although signal lag was highly variable. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) indicated strong evidence that signal lag and tag retention were both negatively correlated with water temperature, but were not affected by prey species and only slightly by individual predator traits. There was preliminary evidence that prey size may be an important determinant of both signal lag and tag retention. False‐positives in live fish were absent after 120 days for generation 1 tags ( n = 31), however, the false‐positive rates were significantly higher (10/44) after only 66 days for generation 2 tags. False‐positives in dead fish showed that 20% of the generation 2 predation tags would falsely trigger 2–3 days post‐mortem. Testing of the novel predation tags was encouraging, however, further testing is recommended. Predation tags will be an important contribution to the field of acoustic telemetry, thus, permitting the improved data interpretation and less‐subjective estimates of predation rates in biotelemetry studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations109
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207