Automated data analysis to rapidly derive and communicate ecological insights from satellite-tag data: A case study of reintroduced red kites

Ambio

Volumn 44, Issue , 2015, Pages 612-623

  van der Wal, René ^a   Zeng, Cheng ^a   Heptinstall, Danny ^a   Ponnamperuma, Kapila ^a   Mellish, Chris ^a   Ben, Stuart ^b   Siddharthan, Advaith ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b RSPB CENTRE FOR CONSERVATION SCIENCE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Automated home range calculation; Red kite reintroduction; Satellite tag data; Science communication

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; DATA ACQUISITION; DETECTION METHOD; HOME RANGE; LOCOMOTION; NATURE CONSERVATION; NETWORKING; RAPTOR; REINTRODUCTION; SATELLITE DATA; TELEMETRY;

ANIMALIA; MILVUS MILVUS;

ALGORITHM; ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FALCONIFORMES; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REMOTE SENSING; SCOTLAND; TELEMETRY;

ALGORITHMS; ANIMALS; AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; FALCONIFORMES; HOMING BEHAVIOR; REMOTE SENSING TECHNOLOGY; SCOTLAND; TELEMETRY;

EID: 84945298422     PISSN: 00447447     EISSN: 16547209     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13280-015-0711-3     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Aarts, G., M. MacKenzie, B. McConnell, M. Fedak, and J. Matthiopoulos. 2008. Estimating space-use and habitat preference from wildlife telemetry data. Ecography 31: 140–160. doi:10.1111/j.2007.0906-7590.05236.x.
2. Calenge, C. 2006. The package adehabitat for the R software: A tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecological Modelling 197: 516–519.
3. Carlson, A.E., E.R. Hoffmayer, C.A. Tribuzio, and J.A. Sulikowski. 2014. The use of satellite tags to redefine movement patterns of spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) along the U.S. east coast: Implications for fisheries management. PLoS ONE 9: e103384. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103384.
4. Carter, I. 2007. The red kite, 2nd ed. Shrewsbury: Arlequin Press.
5. Chetkiewicz, C.-L.B., C.C. St. Clair, and M.S. Boyce. 2006. Corridors for conservation: Integrating pattern and process. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 37: 317–342.
6. Clobert, J., J.F. Le Galliard, J. Cote, S. Meylan, and M. Massot. 2009. Informed dispersal, heterogeneity in animal dispersal syndromes and the dynamics of spatially structured populations. Ecology Letters 12: 197–209.
7. Cooke, S.J. 2008. Biotelemetry and biologging in endangered species research and animal conservation: Relevance to regional, national, and IUCN Red List threat assessments. Endangered Species Research 4: 165–185.
8. Cooke, S.J., J.D. Midwood, J.D. Thiem, P. Klimley, M.C. Lucas, E.B. Thorstad, J. Eiler, C. Holbrook, and B.C. Ebner. 2013. Tracking animals in freshwater with electronic tags: Past, present and future. Animal Biotelemetry 1: 5. doi:10.1186/2050-3385-1-5.
9. Curatolo, B.S., and T.E. Cornelius. 2012. Security and tracking system, patent US 8321124 B2. https://www.google.com/patents/US8321124.
10. Davis, P. 1993. The red kite in Wales: Setting the record straight. British Birds 86: 295–298.
11. del Mar Delgado, M., and V. Penteriani. 2008. Behavioural states help translate dispersal movements into spatial distribution patterns of floaters. American Naturalist 172: 475–485.
12. del Mar Delgado, M., V. Penteriani, E. Revilla, and V.O. Nams. 2010. The effect of phenotypic traits and external cues on natal dispersal movements. Journal of Animal Ecology 79: 620–632.
13. Girard, I., J.-P. Ouellet, R. Courtois, C. Dussault, and L. Breton. 2002. Effects of sampling effort based on GPS telemetry on home-range size estimations. Journal of Wildlife Management 66: 1290–1300.
14. Hebblewhite, M., and D.T. Haydon. 2010. Distinguishing technology from biology: A critical review of the use of GPS telemetry data in ecology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 365: 2303–2312.
15. Jonsen, I.D., R.A. Myers, and M.C. James. 2007. Identifying leatherback turtle foraging behaviour from satellite telemetry using a switching state-space model. Marine Ecology Progress Series 337: 255–264.
16. Keating, K., and S. Cherry. 2009. Modeling utilization distributions in space and time. Ecology 90: 1971–1980.
17. Kelly, B.P., O.H. Badajos, M. Kunnasranta, J.R. Moran, M. Martinez-Bakker, D. Wartzok, and P. Boveng. 2010. Seasonal home ranges and fidelity to breeding sites among ringed seals. Polar Biology 33: 1095–1109.
18. Kie, J.G., J. Matthiopoulus, J. Fieberg, R.A. Powell, F. Cagnacci, M.S. Mitchell, J.-M. Gaillard, and P.R. Moorcroft. 2010. The home-range concept: Are traditional estimators still relevant with modern telemetry technology? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series B. 365: 2221–2231.
19. Krapu, G.L., D.A. Brandt, K.L. Jones, and D.H. Johnson. 2011. Geographic distribution of the mid-continent population of sandhill cranes and related management applications. Wildlife Monographs 175: 1–38.
20. Lovegrove, R. 2007. Silent fields: The long decline of a nation’s wildlife. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Morales, J.M., D.T. Haydon, J. Frair, K. Holsinger, and J.M. Fryxell. 2004. Extracting more out of relocation data: Building movement models as mixtures of random walks. Ecology 85: 2436–2445.
22. Pedersen, M.W., T.A. Patterson, U.H. Thygesen, and H. Madsen. 2011. Estimating animal behavior and residency from movement data. Oikos 120: 1281–1290.
23. Ponnamperuma, K., A. Siddharthan, C. Zeng, C. Mellish, and R. van der Wal. 2013. Tag2blog: Narrative generation from satellite tag data. In Proceedings of the 51st annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (ACL 2013), Conference System Demonstrations, 169–174.
24. Shimada, T.R., R. Jones, C. Limpus, and M. Hamann. 2012. Improving data retention and home range estimates by data-driven screening. Marine Ecology Progress Series 457: 171–180.
25. Smart, J., A. Amar, I.M.W. Sim, B. Etheridge, D. Cameron, G. Christiee, and J.D. Wilson. 2010. Illegal killing slows population recovery of a re-introduced raptor of high conservation concern—The red kite Milvus milvus. Biological Conservation 143: 1278–1286.
26. Snyder, J.P. 1987. Map Projections: A working manual. USGS Professional Paper 1395. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
27. Sumner, M.D., S.J. Wotherspoon, and M.A. Hindell. 2009. Bayesian estimation of animal movement from archival and satellite tags. PLoS ONE 4: e7324. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007324.
28. Tomkiewicz, S.M., M.R. Fuller, J.G. Kie, and K.K. Bates. 2010. Global positioning system and associated technologies in animal behaviour and ecological research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series B 365: 2163–2176.
29. Verma, A., R. van der Wal, and A. Fischer. 2015. Microscope and spectacle: On the complexities of using new visual technologies to communicate about wildlife conservation. Ambio 44(Suppl. 4). doi:10.1007/s13280-015-0715-z.
30. Wall, J., G. Wittemyer, B. Klinkenberg, and I. Douglas-Hamilton. 2014. Novel opportunities for wildlife conservation and research with real-time monitoring. Ecological Applications 24: 593–601.
31. Witt, M.J., P.D. Doherty, B.J. Godley, R.T. Graham, L.A. Hawkes, and S.M. Henderson. 2014. Basking shark satellite tagging project: Insights into basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus) movement, distribution and behaviour using satellite telemetry (Phase 1, July 2014). Report No: Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned. 752.