Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39355112›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2024

On the move: Influence of animal movements on count error during drone surveys.

Emma A Schultz, Natasha Ellison-Neary, Melanie R Boudreau, Garrett M Street, Landon R Jones, Kristine O Evans, Raymond B Iglay

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Emma A SchultzDepartment of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State Mississippi USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5254-2598
Natasha Ellison-NearyDepartment of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State Mississippi USA.
Melanie R BoudreauDepartment of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State Mississippi USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6280-5598
Garrett M StreetDepartment of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State Mississippi USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1260-9214
Landon R JonesDepartment of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State Mississippi USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1814-6115
Kristine O EvansDepartment of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State Mississippi USA.
Raymond B IglayDepartment of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State Mississippi USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of remote sensing to monitor animal populations has greatly expanded during the last decade. Drones (i.e., Unoccupied Aircraft Systems or UAS) provide a cost- and time-efficient remote sensing option to survey animals in various landscapes and sampling conditions. However, drone-based surveys may also introduce counting errors, especially when monitoring mobile animals. Using an agent-based model simulation approach, we evaluated the error associated with counting a single animal across various drone flight patterns under three animal movement strategies (random, directional persistence, and biased toward a resource) among five animal speeds (2, 4, 6, 8, 10 m/s). Flight patterns represented increasing spatial independence (ranging from lawnmower pattern with image overlap to systematic point counts). Simulation results indicated that flight pattern was the most important variable influencing count accuracy, followed by the type of animal movement pattern, and then animal speed. A  awnmower pattern with 0% overlap produced the most accurate count of a solitary, moving animal on a landscape (average count of 1.1 ± 0.6) regardless of the animal's movement pattern and speed. Image overlap flight patterns were more likely to result in multiple counts even when accounting for mosaicking. Based on our simulations, we recommend using a lawnmower pattern with 0% image overlap to minimize error and augment drone efficacy for animal surveys. Our work highlights the importance of understanding interactions between animal movements and drone survey design on count accuracy to inform the development of broad applications among diverse species and ecosystems.

Indexed as

agent‐based modelcount biasremotely piloted aircraft systemsurvey errorunmanned aerial vehicleunoccupied aircraft system

Identifiers

PMID39355112
PMCPMC11439628

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.