Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36959671›Full record

ArticleMovement ecology2023

Linking movement and dive data to prey distribution models: new insights in foraging behaviour and potential pitfalls of movement analyses.

Katie R N Florko, Courtney R Shuert, William W L Cheung, Steven H Ferguson, Ian D Jonsen, David A S Rosen, U Rashid Sumaila, Travis C Tai, David J Yurkowski, Marie Auger-Méthé

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Movement ecology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Katie R N FlorkoAquatic Ecosystem Research Laboratory, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. katieflorko@gmail.com.
Courtney R ShuertDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON, Canada.
William W L CheungAquatic Ecosystem Research Laboratory, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.
Steven H FergusonFisheries and Oceans Canada, Freshwater Institute, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Ian D JonsenSchool of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
David A S RosenAquatic Ecosystem Research Laboratory, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.
U Rashid SumailaAquatic Ecosystem Research Laboratory, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.
Travis C TaiPacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.
David J YurkowskiFisheries and Oceans Canada, Freshwater Institute, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Marie Auger-MéthéAquatic Ecosystem Research Laboratory, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.
University of British Columbia · CAFisheries and Oceans Canada · CAMacquarie University · AUUniversity of Manitoba · CAUniversity of Victoria · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnimal movement data are regularly used to infer foraging behaviour and relationships to environmental characteristics, often to help identify critical habitat. To characterize foraging, movement models make a set of assumptions rooted in theory, for example, time spent foraging in an area increases with higher prey density.

methodsWe assessed the validity of these assumptions by associating horizontal movement and diving of satellite-telemetered ringed seals (Pusa hispida)-an opportunistic predator-in Hudson Bay, Canada, to modelled prey data and environmental proxies.

resultsModelled prey biomass data performed better than their environmental proxies (e.g., sea surface temperature) for explaining seal movement; however movement was not related to foraging effort. Counter to theory, seals appeared to forage more in areas with relatively lower prey diversity and biomass, potentially due to reduced foraging efficiency in those areas.

conclusionsOur study highlights the need to validate movement analyses with prey data to effectively estimate the relationship between prey availability and foraging behaviour.

Indexed as

Animal trackingBiologgingHabitat selectionMovement ecologyMove-persistence mixed-effects modelSimpson’s Diversity IndexTrophic interactions

Identifiers

PMID36959671
PMCPMC10037791
OpenAlexW4360610593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read9
table measurements read2
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.