Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38440082›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2024

Validating hidden Markov models for seabird behavioural inference.

Rebecca A Akeresola, Adam Butler, Esther L Jones, Ruth King, Víctor Elvira, Julie Black, Gail Robertson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors.

Rebecca A AkeresolaSchool of Mathematics and Maxwell Institute for Mathematical Sciences University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-0725-4630
Adam ButlerBiomathematics & Statistics Scotland Edinburgh UK.
Esther L JonesBiomathematics & Statistics Scotland Edinburgh UK.
Ruth KingSchool of Mathematics and Maxwell Institute for Mathematical Sciences University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK.
Víctor ElviraSchool of Mathematics and Maxwell Institute for Mathematical Sciences University of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK.
Julie BlackJoint Nature Conservation Committee Aberdeen UK.
Gail RobertsonBiomathematics & Statistics Scotland Edinburgh UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding animal movement and behaviour can aid spatial planning and inform conservation management. However, it is difficult to directly observe behaviours in remote and hostile terrain such as the marine environment. Different underlying states can be identified from telemetry data using hidden Markov models (HMMs). The inferred states are subsequently associated with different behaviours, using ecological knowledge of the species. However, the inferred behaviours are not typically validated due to difficulty obtaining 'ground truth' behavioural information. We investigate the accuracy of inferred behaviours by considering a unique data set provided by Joint Nature Conservation Committee. The data consist of simultaneous proxy movement tracks of the boat (defined as visual tracks as birds are followed by eye) and seabird behaviour obtained by observers on the boat. We demonstrate that visual tracking data is suitable for our study. Accuracy of HMMs ranging from 71% to 87% during chick-rearing and 54% to 70% during incubation was generally insensitive to model choice, even when AIC values varied substantially across different models. Finally, we show that for foraging, a state of primary interest for conservation purposes, identified missed foraging bouts lasted for only a few seconds. We conclude that HMMs fitted to tracking data have the potential to accurately identify important conservation-relevant behaviours, demonstrated by a comparison in which visual tracking data provide a 'gold standard' of manually classified behaviours to validate against. Confidence in using HMMs for behavioural inference should increase as a result of these findings, but future work is needed to assess the generalisability of the results, and we recommend that, wherever feasible, validation data be collected alongside GPS tracking data to validate model performance. This work has important implications for animal conservation, where the size and location of protected areas are often informed by behaviours identified using HMMs fitted to movement data.

Indexed as

conservationGPS datamovement datamovement modellingvisual tracking

Identifiers

PMID38440082
PMCPMC10911961

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.