Evaluation of acoustic telemetry grids for determining aquatic animal movement and survival

Richard T. Kraus; Christopher M. Holbrook; Christopher Vandergoot; Taylor R. Stewart; Matthew D. Faust; Douglas A. Watkinson; Colin Charles; Mark Pegg; Eva C. Enders; Charles C. Krueger

doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12996

USGS · 70195980

Evaluation of acoustic telemetry grids for determining aquatic animal movement and survival

Richard T. Kraus·Christopher M. Holbrook·Christopher Vandergoot·Taylor R. Stewart·Matthew D. Faust·Douglas A. Watkinson·Colin Charles·Mark Pegg·Eva C. Enders·Charles C. Krueger

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Acoustic telemetry studies have frequently prioritized linear configurations of hydrophone receivers, such as perpendicular from shorelines or across rivers, to detect the presence of tagged aquatic animals. This approach introduces unknown bias when receivers are stationed for convenience at geographic bottlenecks (e.g., at the mouth of an embayment or between islands) as opposed to deployments following a statistical sampling design. We evaluated two-dimensional acoustic receiver arrays (grids: receivers spread uniformly across space) as an alternative approach to provide estimates of survival, movement, and habitat use. Performance of variably-spaced receiver grids (5–25 km spacing) was evaluated by simulating (1) animal tracks as correlated random walks (speed: 0.1–0.9 m/s; turning angle standard deviation: 5–30 degrees); (2) variable tag transmission intervals along each track (nominal delay: 15–300 seconds); and (3) probability of detection of each transmission based on logistic detection range curves (midpoint: 200–1500 m). From simulations, we quantified i) time between successive detections on any receiver (detection time), ii) time between successive detections on different receivers (transit time), and iii) distance between successive detections on different receivers (transit distance). In the most restrictive detection range scenario (200 m), the 95 th percentile of transit time was 3.2 days at 5 km grid spacing, 5.7 days at 7 km, and 15.2 days at 25 km; for the 1500 m detection range scenario, it was 0.1 days at 5 km, 0.5 days at 7 km, and 10.8 days at 25 km. These values represented upper bounds on the expected maximum time that an animal could go undetected. Comparison of the simulations with pilot studies on three fishes (walleye Sander vitreus , common carp Cyprinus carpio , and channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus ) from two independent large lake ecosystems (lakes Erie and Winnipeg) revealed shorter detection and transit times than what simulations predicted. By spreading effort uniformly across space, grids can improve understanding of fish migration over the commonly employed receiver line approach, but at increased time cost for maintaining grids.

Explore related subjects

Methods in Ecology and Evolution Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Richard T. Kraus, Christopher M. Holbrook, Christopher Vandergoot, Taylor R. Stewart, Matthew D. Faust, Douglas A. Watkinson, Colin Charles, Mark Pegg, Eva C. Enders, Charles C. Krueger. 2018-03-30. Evaluation of acoustic telemetry grids for determining aquatic animal movement and survival. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12996

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

A systematic review of avian influenza virus transmission models: Gaps and opportunities

Highly pathogenic avian influenza virus (HPAIV) increasingly threatens wild birds, poultry, non-human mammals and humans, yet gaps and opportunities in avian influenza virus (AIV) transmission modelling have not been comprehensively synthesized. We reviewed 182 articles published through 2025, categorized dimensions, including modelling approaches, data, host types, biological levels, spatial scales, temporal scales and model objectives, examined associations among these dimensions, and synthesized author-stated limitations and recommendations. Statistical and mechanistic models dominated. Model data centred on population dynamics and demography, disease surveillance, host epidemiology and competence, meteorology and land use and land cover. Most studies focused on poultry or wild birds at regional spatial scales, seasonal/annual and multi-year temporal scales, population or multi-population levels, and were retrospective. Machine learning and decision- making models were less common. Immunity, behaviour and life history, community composition, morphology, viral genetics and viral persistence received less attention. Non-human mammals, individual and community biological levels, local and broader spatial scales, daily temporal scales and prospective modelling were also less frequently modelled. The authors frequently reported limitations related to data availability, surveillance sampling and reporting bias, and model simplification, while commonly recommending improved data quality and greater model complexity and realism.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution↗

USGS2026

Spatially realistic dynamic N-mixture models

Dispersal is a complex ecological process that can be driven by the abiotic environment, density-dependent processes and species mobility. Traditionally, dispersal has been studied with capture-based data that are often limited in space and time. More recently, spatial dynamic N-mixture models (i.e. N-mixture models accounting for dispersal among local populations and changes in abundance over time) allow the study of dispersal with count data. However, current spatial dynamic N-mixture models focus mainly on distance-based dispersal, limiting our ability to evaluate realistic patterns and drivers of dispersal at relevant spatial and temporal scales. We developed a spatially realistic dynamic N-mixture model that allows dispersal to be driven by environmental conditions and population density. Using simulations, we evaluated the inferential performance of this model when large proportions of sites are unsurveyed and the survey period is short, situations that are typical of real-world studies. We then used two case studies to illustrate the applications of this model, one representing a species with limited mobility in fragmented habitat (Chiricahua Leopard Frogs, Lithobates chiricahuensis , in isolated ponds) and the other representing a species with great mobility in continuous heterogeneous habitat (Common Nighthawks, Chordeiles minor , in grasslands). Our simulation study showed that the model provides valid inference even when the number of surveyed sites is small (𝑛 =10) or when the survey period is short for dynamic models (5 years), indicating that the model could have great practical value in real-world studies. The case study of Chiricahua Leopard Frogs showed that the model is capable of revealing pond-type-specific dispersal and predicting dispersal among ponds. The case study of Common Nighthawks showed the ability of the model to reveal the effect of primary productivity on dispersal and to map dispersal across the study area. Our effort demonstrates the potential of using count data to gain insights about complex yet realistic dispersal processes. The model that we introduce is flexible and adaptable for a broad range of situations in population and conservation ecology

Arizona, Kansas↗

USGS2025

Simulated soundscapes and transfer learning boost the performance of acoustic classifiers under data scarcity

1. The biodiversity crisis necessitates spatially extensive methods to monitor multiple taxonomic groups for evidence of change in response to evolving environmental conditions. Programs that combine passive acoustic monitoring and machine learning are increasingly used to meet this need. These methods require large, annotated datasets, which are time-consuming and expensive to produce, creating potential barriers to adoption in data- and funding-poor regions. Recently released pre-trained avian acoustic classification models provide opportunities to reduce the need for manual labelling and accelerate the development of new acoustic classification algorithms through transfer learning. Transfer learning is a strategy for developing algorithms under data scarcity that uses pre-trained models from related tasks to adapt to new tasks. 2. Our primary objective was to develop a transfer learning strategy using the feature embeddings of a pre-trained avian classification model to train custom acoustic classification models in data-scarce contexts. We used three annotated avian acoustic datasets to test whether transfer learning and soundscape simulation-based data augmentation could substantially reduce the annotated training data necessary to develop performant custom acoustic classifiers. We also conducted a sensitivity analysis for hyperparameter choice and model architecture. We then assessed the generalizability of our strategy to increasingly novel non-avian classification tasks. 3. With as few as two training examples per class, our soundscape simulation data augmentation approach consistently yielded new classifiers with improved performance relative to the pre-trained classification model and transfer learning classifiers trained with other augmentation approaches. Performance increases were evident for three avian test datasets, including single-class and multi-label contexts. We observed that the relative performance among our data augmentation approaches varied for the avian datasets and nearly converged for one dataset when we included more training examples. 4. We demonstrate an efficient approach to developing new acoustic classifiers leveraging open-source sound repositories and pre-trained networks to reduce manual labelling. With very few examples, our soundscape simulation approach to data augmentation yielded classifiers with performance equivalent to those trained with many more examples, showing it is possible to reduce manual label-ling while still achieving high-performance classifiers and, in turn, expanding the potential for passive acoustic monitoring to address rising biodiversity monitoring needs.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution↗