Abstract
We compared the results from fixed acoustic transmitters and transmitters implanted in lingcod Ophiodon elongatus provided by two fine-scale passive acoustic monitoring systems: the older Vemco© Radio Acoustic Positioning (VRAP) system and the newer VR2W Positioning System (VPS) with either three or four receivers. The four-receiver VPS method calculated five times more positions of lingcod than VRAP and more than twice as many as the three-receiver VPS. Calculated positions of fixed transmitters were less precise with VRAP than either VPS approach. Measurements of home range for lingcod were similar between the four-receiver VPS and VRAP, which were both greater than the three-receiver VPS. Comparisons varied when lingcod were in/near complex habitats. As new technology develops, it is important to understand how new methods compare to previous methods. This may be important when describing patterns of movement or habitat use in the context of changes in habitat or management efforts.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
