Limits...
Can you hear me now? Range ‐ testing a submerged passive acoustic receiver array in a Caribbean coral reef habitat

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Submerged passive acoustic technology allows researchers to investigate spatial and temporal movement patterns of many marine and freshwater species. The technology uses receivers to detect and record acoustic transmissions emitted from tags attached to an individual. Acoustic signal strength naturally attenuates over distance, but numerous environmental variables also affect the probability a tag is detected. Knowledge of receiver range is crucial for designing acoustic arrays and analyzing telemetry data. Here, we present a method for testing a relatively large‐scale receiver array in a dynamic Caribbean coastal environment intended for long‐term monitoring of multiple species. The U.S. Geological Survey and several academic institutions in collaboration with resource management at Buck Island Reef National Monument (BIRNM), off the coast of St. Croix, recently deployed a 52 passive acoustic receiver array. We targeted 19 array‐representative receivers for range‐testing by submersing fixed delay interval range‐testing tags at various distance intervals in each cardinal direction from a receiver for a minimum of an hour. Using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), we estimated the probability of detection across the array and assessed the effect of water depth, habitat, wind, temperature, and time of day on the probability of detection. The predicted probability of detection across the entire array at 100 m distance from a receiver was 58.2% (95% CI: 44.0–73.0%) and dropped to 26.0% (95% CI: 11.4–39.3%) 200 m from a receiver indicating a somewhat constrained effective detection range. Detection probability varied across habitat classes with the greatest effective detection range occurring in homogenous sand substrate and the smallest in high rugosity reef. Predicted probability of detection across BIRNM highlights potential gaps in coverage using the current array as well as limitations of passive acoustic technology within a complex coral reef environment.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Preliminary 48‐h detection histories. Bar plots show the number of detections during each hour of the day for both transmitters deployed on each of the four receivers. Distance to receiver was staggered with the closer one denoted by green and the farther one red. Gray shading represents hours designated as night‐time.
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4979710&req=5

ece32228-fig-0006: Preliminary 48‐h detection histories. Bar plots show the number of detections during each hour of the day for both transmitters deployed on each of the four receivers. Distance to receiver was staggered with the closer one denoted by green and the farther one red. Gray shading represents hours designated as night‐time.

Mentions: Estimates for time of day coefficients indicate a greater probability of detection later into the evening and at night relative to events conducted in the morning (Table 2). The detection pattern at receiver #15 from the preliminary 48‐h deployed tags showed a similar trend with a significant decrease (P < 0.001) in the number of detections recorded during the day as opposed to the night based on Fisher's exact test. However, detection data from receiver #03 showed the opposite trend and receivers #05 and #12 had no significant difference in the number of detections between the night and day (Fig. 6).


Can you hear me now? Range ‐ testing a submerged passive acoustic receiver array in a Caribbean coral reef habitat
Preliminary 48‐h detection histories. Bar plots show the number of detections during each hour of the day for both transmitters deployed on each of the four receivers. Distance to receiver was staggered with the closer one denoted by green and the farther one red. Gray shading represents hours designated as night‐time.
© Copyright Policy - creativeCommonsBy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4979710&req=5

ece32228-fig-0006: Preliminary 48‐h detection histories. Bar plots show the number of detections during each hour of the day for both transmitters deployed on each of the four receivers. Distance to receiver was staggered with the closer one denoted by green and the farther one red. Gray shading represents hours designated as night‐time.
Mentions: Estimates for time of day coefficients indicate a greater probability of detection later into the evening and at night relative to events conducted in the morning (Table 2). The detection pattern at receiver #15 from the preliminary 48‐h deployed tags showed a similar trend with a significant decrease (P < 0.001) in the number of detections recorded during the day as opposed to the night based on Fisher's exact test. However, detection data from receiver #03 showed the opposite trend and receivers #05 and #12 had no significant difference in the number of detections between the night and day (Fig. 6).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Submerged passive acoustic technology allows researchers to investigate spatial and temporal movement patterns of many marine and freshwater species. The technology uses receivers to detect and record acoustic transmissions emitted from tags attached to an individual. Acoustic signal strength naturally attenuates over distance, but numerous environmental variables also affect the probability a tag is detected. Knowledge of receiver range is crucial for designing acoustic arrays and analyzing telemetry data. Here, we present a method for testing a relatively large&#8208;scale receiver array in a dynamic Caribbean coastal environment intended for long&#8208;term monitoring of multiple species. The U.S. Geological Survey and several academic institutions in collaboration with resource management at Buck Island Reef National Monument (BIRNM), off the coast of St. Croix, recently deployed a 52 passive acoustic receiver array. We targeted 19 array&#8208;representative receivers for range&#8208;testing by submersing fixed delay interval range&#8208;testing tags at various distance intervals in each cardinal direction from a receiver for a minimum of an hour. Using a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM), we estimated the probability of detection across the array and assessed the effect of water depth, habitat, wind, temperature, and time of day on the probability of detection. The predicted probability of detection across the entire array at 100&nbsp;m distance from a receiver was 58.2% (95% CI: 44.0&ndash;73.0%) and dropped to 26.0% (95% CI: 11.4&ndash;39.3%) 200&nbsp;m from a receiver indicating a somewhat constrained effective detection range. Detection probability varied across habitat classes with the greatest effective detection range occurring in homogenous sand substrate and the smallest in high rugosity reef. Predicted probability of detection across BIRNM highlights potential gaps in coverage using the current array as well as limitations of passive acoustic technology within a complex coral reef environment.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus