Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39822117›Full record

ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2025

Closing the air gap: the use of drones for studying wildlife ecophysiology.

Adam Yaney-Keller, Rebecca R McIntosh, Rohan H Clarke, Richard D Reina

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Adam Yaney-KellerSchool of Biological Sciences, Monash University, 25 Rainforest Walk, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1538-664X
Rebecca R McIntoshResearch Department, Phillip Island Nature Parks, 154/156 Thompson Avenue, Cowes, Victoria, 3922, Australia.
Rohan H ClarkeSchool of Biological Sciences, Monash University, 25 Rainforest Walk, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia.
Richard D ReinaSchool of Biological Sciences, Monash University, 25 Rainforest Walk, Clayton, Victoria, 3800, Australia.

Funding

Australian Education International, Australian Government
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Techniques for non-invasive sampling of ecophysiological data in wild animals have been developed in response to challenges associated with studying captive animals or using invasive methods. Of these, drones, also known as Unoccupied Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), and their associated sensors, have emerged as a promising tool in the ecophysiology toolkit. In this review, we synthesise research in a scoping review on the use of drones for studying wildlife ecophysiology using the PRISMA-SCr checklist and identify where efforts have been focused and where knowledge gaps remain. We use these results to explore current best practices and challenges and provide recommendations for future use. In 136 studies published since 2010, drones aided studies on wild animal body condition and morphometrics, kinematics and biomechanics, bioenergetics, and wildlife health (e.g. microbiomes, endocrinology, and disease) in both aquatic and terrestrial environments. Focal taxa are biased towards marine mammals, particularly cetaceans. While conducted globally, research is primarily led by institutions based in North America, Oceania, and Europe. The use of drones to obtain body condition and morphometric data through standard colour sensors and single camera photogrammetry predominates. Techniques such as video tracking and thermal imaging have also allowed insights into other aspects of wildlife ecophysiology, particularly when combined with external sampling techniques such as biologgers. While most studies have used commercially available multirotor platforms and standard colour sensors, the modification of drones to collect samples, and integration with external sampling techniques, have allowed multidisciplinary studies to integrate a suite of remote sensing methods more fully. We outline how technological advances for drones will play a key role in the delivery of both novel and improved wildlife ecophysiological data. We recommend that researchers prepare for the influx of drone-assisted advancements in wildlife ecophysiology through multidisciplinary and cross-institutional collaborations. We describe best practices to diversify across species and environments and use current data sources and technologies for more comprehensive results.

Indexed as

Animals, WildEcologyUnmanned Aerial DevicesAnimalsEcosystembioenergeticsbody conditionecophysiologykinematicsmorphometricsremotely piloted aircraftremote sensingunmanned aerial vehiclesunoccupied aerial vehicleswildlife health

Identifiers

PMID39822117
PMCPMC12120397

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.