Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28989756›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2017

Does detection range matter for inferring social networks in a benthic shark using acoustic telemetry?

Johann Mourier, Nathan Charles Bass, Tristan L Guttridge, Joanna Day, Culum Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Social networks and the conservation of fish.Communications biology · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Johann MourierDepartment of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, New South Wales 2109, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9019-1717
Nathan Charles BassDepartment of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, New South Wales 2109, Australia.
Tristan L GuttridgeBimini Biological Field Station Foundation, 15 Elizabeth Drive, South Bimini, Bahamas.
Joanna DayTaronga Conservation Society Australia, Mosman, New South Wales 2088, Australia.
Culum BrownDepartment of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, New South Wales 2109, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

acoustic telemetrydetection rangefishsharksocial networks

Identifiers

PMID28989756
PMCPMC5627096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.