MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288385660 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1886921/v1

Lab and field evaluation of tagging methods for the use of acoustic telemetry to observe sea urchin movement behaviour at ecologically relevant spatio-temporal scales

2022· preprint· en· W4288385660 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen A. MacGregor, Marie-France Lavoie, Shawn Robinson, Émilie Simard, Christopher W. McKindsey

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Acidification Effects and Responses
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrongylocentrotus droebachiensisSea urchinTelemetryFishingBiotelemetryFisheryInvertebrateEnvironmental scienceBiologyComputer scienceEcologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Acoustic telemetry allows detailed observations of the movement behaviour of many species and as tags get smaller, smaller organisms may be tagged. The number of studies using acoustic telemetry to evaluate marine invertebrate movement is growing, but novel attachment methods include unknowns about the effects of tagging procedures on individual survival and behaviour. This study compared methods of tag attachment on green sea urchins ( Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis ) to determine the feasibility of using acoustic transmitters to track urchin movement. Four tagging methods were compared in the lab and tag retention, urchin condition, and survival analyzed. Two tagging methods (Dyneema® fishing line and T-bar tags) were evaluated in the field using an existing acoustic telemetry array. Urchins were tagged and the study area revisited one week and two months post-release by scuba divers to estimate movement and tag retention. Results The best methods in the lab, with high tag retention, survival, and minimal effects on urchin condition, were fishing line methods. T-bar tags, although showing high tag retention, caused significant mortality and had deleterious long-term effects on urchin condition and behaviour. After two months in the field, as in the lab, fishing line was a more effective tagging method. Urchins tagged with fishing line showed increased estimates of space occupancy compared to T-bar-tagged urchins and a single fishing-line tagged individual was found by divers in good health after 80 days. Combined, these laboratory and field results demonstrate the feasibility of using acoustic telemetry to observe urchin movement. Conclusions Results strongly suggest that surgical attachment methods that minimize injuries at the attachment site should be prioritized for marine echinoderm tagging studies. Together, lab and field tests indicate that acoustic telemetry is a promising method to examine marine echinoderm movement over ecologically relevant spatial and temporal scales.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.007
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicOcean Acidification Effects and ResponsesFrench-language works237,207