Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35123592›Full record

ArticleMovement ecology2022

Categorising cheetah behaviour using tri-axial accelerometer data loggers: a comparison of model resolution and data logger performance.

Natasha E McGowan, Nikki J Marks, Aaron G Maule, Anne Schmidt-Küntzel, Laurie L Marker, David M Scantlebury

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Movement ecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Natasha E McGowanSchool of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, BT9 5DL, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0451-1049
Nikki J MarksSchool of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, BT9 5DL, UK.
Aaron G MauleSchool of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, BT9 5DL, UK.
Anne Schmidt-KüntzelCheetah Conservation Fund, PO Box 1755, Otjiwarongo, Namibia.
Laurie L MarkerCheetah Conservation Fund, PO Box 1755, Otjiwarongo, Namibia.
David M ScantleburySchool of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, BT9 5DL, UK. nmcgowan04@qub.ac.uk.
Queen's University Belfast · GBCheetah Conservation Fund · NA

Funding

Natural Environment Research Council NE//I002030/1Royal Society 2009/R3 JP090604
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExtinction is one of the greatest threats to the living world, endangering organisms globally, advancing conservation to the forefront of species research. To maximise the efficacy of conservation efforts, understanding the ecological, physiological, and behavioural requirements of vulnerable species is vital. Technological advances, particularly in remote sensing, enable researchers to continuously monitor movement and behaviours of multiple individuals simultaneously with minimal human intervention. Cheetahs, Acinonyx jubatus, constitute a "vulnerable" species for which only coarse behaviours have been elucidated. The aims of this study were to use animal-attached accelerometers to (1) determine fine-scale behaviours in cheetahs, (2) compare the performances of different devices in behaviour categorisation, and (3) provide a behavioural categorisation framework.

methodsTwo different accelerometer devices (CEFAS, frequency: 30 Hz, maximum capacity: ~ 2 g; GCDC, frequency: 50 Hz, maximum capacity: ~ 8 g) were mounted onto collars, fitted to five individual captive cheetahs. The cheetahs chased a lure around a track, during which time their behaviours were videoed. Accelerometer data were temporally aligned with corresponding video footage and labelled with one of 17 behaviours. Six separate random forest models were run (three per device type) to determine the categorisation accuracy for behaviours at a fine, medium, and coarse resolution.

resultsFine- and medium-scale models had an overall categorisation accuracy of 83-86% and 84-88% respectively. Non-locomotory behaviours were best categorised on both loggers with GCDC outperforming CEFAS devices overall. On a coarse scale, both devices performed well when categorising activity (86.9% (CEFAS) vs. 89.3% (GCDC) accuracy) and inactivity (95.5% (CEFAS) vs. 95.0% (GCDC) accuracy). This study defined cheetah behaviour beyond three categories and accurately determined stalking behaviours by remote sensing. We also show that device specification and configuration may affect categorisation accuracy, so we recommend deploying several different loggers simultaneously on the same individual.

conclusionThe results of this study will be useful in determining wild cheetah behaviour. The methods used here allowed broad-scale (active/inactive) as well as fine-scale (e.g. stalking) behaviours to be categorised remotely. These findings and methodological approaches will be useful in monitoring the behaviour of wild cheetahs and other species of conservation interest.

Indexed as

Accelerometer performanceAccelerometryBehaviour classificationCheetahH2O packageRandom forest

Identifiers

PMID35123592
PMCPMC8818224
OpenAlexW4210292411

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.