Cargando…

Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices

Advances in animal biologging technologies have greatly improved our understanding of animal movement and distribution, particularly for highly mobile species that travel across vast spatial scales. Assessing the accuracy of these devices is critical to drawing appropriate conclusions from resulting...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lato, Kimberly A., Stepanuk, Julia E. F., Heywood, Eleanor I., Conners, Melinda G., Thorne, Lesley H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9605028/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36288345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276098
_version_ 1784817963687215104
author Lato, Kimberly A.
Stepanuk, Julia E. F.
Heywood, Eleanor I.
Conners, Melinda G.
Thorne, Lesley H.
author_facet Lato, Kimberly A.
Stepanuk, Julia E. F.
Heywood, Eleanor I.
Conners, Melinda G.
Thorne, Lesley H.
author_sort Lato, Kimberly A.
collection PubMed
description Advances in animal biologging technologies have greatly improved our understanding of animal movement and distribution, particularly for highly mobile species that travel across vast spatial scales. Assessing the accuracy of these devices is critical to drawing appropriate conclusions from resulting data. While understanding the vertical dimension of movements is key to assessing habitat use and behavior in aerial species, previous studies have primarily focused on assessing the accuracy of biologging devices in the horizontal plane with far less emphasis placed on the vertical plane. Here we use an Unaccompanied Aircraft System (UAS) outfitted with a laser altimeter to broadly assess the accuracy of altitude estimates of three commonly used avian biologging devices during three field trials: stationary flights, continuous horizontal movements, and continuous vertical movements. We found that the device measuring barometric pressure consistently provided the most accurate altitude estimates (mean error of 1.57m) and effectively captured finer-scale vertical movements. Conversely, devices that relied upon GPS triangulation to estimate altitude typically overestimated altitude during horizontal movements (mean error of 6.5m or 40.96m) and underestimated amplitude during vertical movements. Additional factors thought to impact device accuracy, including Horizontal- and Position- Dilution of Precision and the time intervals over which altitude estimates were assessed, did not have notable effects on results in our analyses. Reported accuracy values for different devices may be useful in future studies of aerial species’ behavior relative to vertical obstacles such as wind turbines. Our results suggest that studies seeking to quantify altitude of aerial species should prioritize pressure-based measurements, which provide sufficient resolution for examining broad and some fine-scale behaviors. This work highlights the importance of considering and accounting for error in altitude measurements during avian studies relative to the scale of data needed to address particular scientific questions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9605028
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96050282022-10-27 Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices Lato, Kimberly A. Stepanuk, Julia E. F. Heywood, Eleanor I. Conners, Melinda G. Thorne, Lesley H. PLoS One Research Article Advances in animal biologging technologies have greatly improved our understanding of animal movement and distribution, particularly for highly mobile species that travel across vast spatial scales. Assessing the accuracy of these devices is critical to drawing appropriate conclusions from resulting data. While understanding the vertical dimension of movements is key to assessing habitat use and behavior in aerial species, previous studies have primarily focused on assessing the accuracy of biologging devices in the horizontal plane with far less emphasis placed on the vertical plane. Here we use an Unaccompanied Aircraft System (UAS) outfitted with a laser altimeter to broadly assess the accuracy of altitude estimates of three commonly used avian biologging devices during three field trials: stationary flights, continuous horizontal movements, and continuous vertical movements. We found that the device measuring barometric pressure consistently provided the most accurate altitude estimates (mean error of 1.57m) and effectively captured finer-scale vertical movements. Conversely, devices that relied upon GPS triangulation to estimate altitude typically overestimated altitude during horizontal movements (mean error of 6.5m or 40.96m) and underestimated amplitude during vertical movements. Additional factors thought to impact device accuracy, including Horizontal- and Position- Dilution of Precision and the time intervals over which altitude estimates were assessed, did not have notable effects on results in our analyses. Reported accuracy values for different devices may be useful in future studies of aerial species’ behavior relative to vertical obstacles such as wind turbines. Our results suggest that studies seeking to quantify altitude of aerial species should prioritize pressure-based measurements, which provide sufficient resolution for examining broad and some fine-scale behaviors. This work highlights the importance of considering and accounting for error in altitude measurements during avian studies relative to the scale of data needed to address particular scientific questions. Public Library of Science 2022-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9605028/ /pubmed/36288345 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276098 Text en © 2022 Lato et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lato, Kimberly A.
Stepanuk, Julia E. F.
Heywood, Eleanor I.
Conners, Melinda G.
Thorne, Lesley H.
Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices
title Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices
title_full Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices
title_fullStr Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices
title_short Assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices
title_sort assessing the accuracy of altitude estimates in avian biologging devices
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9605028/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36288345
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276098
work_keys_str_mv AT latokimberlya assessingtheaccuracyofaltitudeestimatesinavianbiologgingdevices
AT stepanukjuliaef assessingtheaccuracyofaltitudeestimatesinavianbiologgingdevices
AT heywoodeleanori assessingtheaccuracyofaltitudeestimatesinavianbiologgingdevices
AT connersmelindag assessingtheaccuracyofaltitudeestimatesinavianbiologgingdevices
AT thornelesleyh assessingtheaccuracyofaltitudeestimatesinavianbiologgingdevices