Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33006076›Full record

ArticleOecologia2020

Application of machine learning algorithms to identify cryptic reproductive habitats using diverse information sources.

Jacob W Brownscombe, Lucas P Griffin, Danielle Morley, Alejandro Acosta, John Hunt, Susan K Lowerre-Barbieri, Aaron J Adams, Andy J Danylchuk, Steven J Cooke

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oecologia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

9 authors.

Jacob W BrownscombeFish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel by Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada. jakebrownscombe@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2496-8764
Lucas P GriffinDepartment of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 160 Holdsworth Way, Amherst, MA, 01003, USA.
Danielle MorleyFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 2796 Overseas Highway, Suite 119, Marathon, FL, 33050, USA.
Alejandro AcostaFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 2796 Overseas Highway, Suite 119, Marathon, FL, 33050, USA.
John HuntFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 2796 Overseas Highway, Suite 119, Marathon, FL, 33050, USA.
Susan K Lowerre-BarbieriFlorida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, 100 8th Avenue Southeast, St. Petersburg, FL, 33701, USA.
Aaron J AdamsBonefish and Tarpon Trust, 135 San Lorenzo Ave., Suite 860, Coral Gables, FL, 33146, USA.
Andy J DanylchukDepartment of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 160 Holdsworth Way, Amherst, MA, 01003, USA.
Steven J CookeFish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel by Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.

Funding

Bonefish and Tarpon Trust (US) Permit Tracking Project
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Information on ecological systems often comes from diverse sources with varied levels of complexity, bias, and uncertainty. Accordingly, analytical techniques continue to evolve that address these challenges to reveal the characteristics of ecological systems and inform conservation actions. We applied multiple statistical learning algorithms (i.e., machine learning) with a range of information sources including fish tracking data, environmental data, and visual surveys to identify potential spawning aggregation sites for a marine fish species, permit (Trachinotus falcatus), in the Florida Keys. Recognizing the potential complementarity and some level of uncertainty in each information source, we applied supervised (classic and conditional random forests; RF) and unsupervised (fuzzy k-means; FKM) algorithms. The two RF models had similar predictive performance, but generated different predictor variable importance structures and spawning site predictions. Unsupervised clustering using FKM identified unique site groupings that were similar to the likely spawning sites identified with RF. The conservation of aggregate spawning fish species depends heavily on the protection of key spawning sites; many of these potential sites were identified here for permit in the Florida Keys, which consisted of relatively deep-water natural and artificial reefs with high mean permit residency periods. The application of multiple machine learning algorithms enabled the integration of diverse information sources to develop models of an ecological system. Faced with increasingly complex and diverse data sources, ecologists, and conservation practitioners should find increasing value in machine learning algorithms, which we discuss here and provide resources to increase accessibility.

Indexed as

EcosystemMachine LearningAlgorithmsAnimalsFloridaReproductionConservationEcologyMachine learningMarine biologySpawning aggregations

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.