MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407328499 · doi:10.1101/2025.02.09.637304

Linking acoustic telemetry data to spatial covariates in river networks with spatially explicit capture-recapture models

2025· preprint· en· W4407328499 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Joseph R Bottoms, Marie Auger‐Méthé, Michael Power, David A. Patterson, J. Mark Shrimpton, Steven J. Cooke, Eduardo G. Martins

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCarleton UniversityUniversity of WaterlooFisheries and Oceans CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsTelemetryMark and recaptureCovariateComputer scienceGeographyEnvironmental scienceStatisticsTelecommunicationsMathematicsMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Spatially explicit capture-recapture (SECR) models extend classical capture-recapture models to include spatially-explicit animal locations and environmental covariates. SECR models have been widely employed in terrestrial studies to predict the population size and densities of animals assuming a closed population over a defined area. In this work, we extend and apply SECR models to a novel use-case that both uses a relative density formulation and accounts for biased tagging distributions to estimate parameters of habitat use from acoustic telemetry data in a branching river network. Using SECR models, we predict how temperature distributions during the summer feeding season influenced how tagged Arctic grayling ( Thymallus arcticus ) distributed themselves through the Parsnip watershed in northcentral British Columbia, Canada. We found that the relative density of tagged Arctic grayling peaked at water temperatures of 12.4 °C. In warm years, relative densities were constricted as parts of the watershed became unfavorably warm. In cool years, fish were distributed widely throughout the watershed. In acoustic telemetry, only the tagged population is available for detection. We highlight several specific considerations and assumptions for using this approach: i.e. (a) activity centres are assumed to remain in the same location throughout the study period, thus the time window of the study should be selected accordingly (e.g., exclude migratory periods); (b) inferences from acoustic telemetry data depict relative (not absolute) densities; and (c) spatial tagging effort must be defined in the model to ensure that predictions are not merely an artefact of tagging effort across space and time. When applied following these assumptions, this method is broadly useful for ecologists as it presents a quantitative way to merge automated telemetry datasets with discrete habitat parameters that drive population distributions through time and are relevant to managers and conservation professionals. Further, this method can be applied to branching river networks in which topological challenges have hindered other statistical approaches.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→