Abstract

Accurately estimating contacts between animals can be critical in ecological studies such as examining social structure, predator–prey interactions or transmission of information and disease. While biotelemetry has been used successfully for such studies in terrestrial systems, it is still under development in the aquatic environment. Acoustic telemetry represents an attractive tool to investigate spatio-temporal behaviour of marine fish and has recently been suggested for monitoring underwater animal interactions. To evaluate the effectiveness of acoustic telemetry in recording interindividual contacts, we compared co-occurrence matrices deduced from three types of acoustic receivers varying in detection range in a benthic shark species. Our results demonstrate that (i) associations produced by acoustic receivers with a large detection range (i.e. Vemco VR2W) were significantly different from those produced by receivers with smaller ranges (i.e. Sonotronics miniSUR receivers and proximity loggers) and (ii) the position of individuals within their network, or centrality, also differed. These findings suggest that acoustic receivers with a large detection range may not be the best option to represent true social networks in the case of a benthic marine animal. While acoustic receivers are increasingly used by marine ecologists, we recommend users first evaluate the influence of detection range to depict accurate individual interactions before using these receivers for social or predator–prey studies. We also advocate for combining multiple receiver types depending on the ecological question being asked and the development of multi-sensor tags or testing of new automated proximity loggers, such as the Encounternet system, to improve the precision and accuracy of social and predator–prey interaction studies.

Highlights

  • Determining animal encounters or contact rates can be central in ecological studies, for example in determining social structure, mating behaviour, predator–prey interactions and information or disease transmission [1,2,3,4]

  • In 2013, data from miniSUR and VR2W were recorded from 23 August to 21 October 2013, and data from miniSURs were filtered for gain 18 and 64 dB

  • Our study provides an example of the limitations and precautions that marine ecologists need to take into account when attempting to depict the social structure of fish aggregations in the marine environment using acoustic telemetry

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Determining animal encounters or contact rates can be central in ecological studies, for example in determining social structure, mating behaviour, predator–prey interactions and information or disease transmission [1,2,3,4]. Directly observing wild animals, in an aquatic environment, is challenging when individuals are hard to identify or when focal subjects are too elusive to get accurate repeated observations. Current technologies, such as Global Positioning System (GPS), used to track individuals and construct social networks in terrestrial animal populations are not applicable in aquatic systems. Most animal social network studies in the marine environment have relied on repeated direct observations of interactions between identified individuals [6,16,17,18]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call