ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparing visual and acoustic detectability of two coastal cetacean species off Sindhudurg, India, to better inform integrated survey protocol.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea) and the Indo-Pacific finless porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides) are resident to the inshore waters of India. Despite urgent conservation concerns facing both species, population assessments and long-term monitoring efforts face several challenges, particularly due to limitations in conducting conventional visual surveys. Our study explores the use of combined acoustic and visual surveys along a 376 km[Formula: see text] area off the Sindhudurg coast, India, to address these limitations. We begin by examining the two platforms for efficiency in species detection by comparing encounter rates across acoustic and visual methods. Acoustic (0.04 groups/km) and visual (0.03 groups/km) encounter rates for humpback dolphins do not show a stark difference. However, acoustic (0.12 groups/km) and visual (0.03 groups/km) encounter rates for finless porpoises vary greatly. Visual and acoustic group size estimates also vary for both species. We then use generalized additive mixed models (GAMM) to determine factors responsible for variation in detectability between the two platforms. Distance from shore and vessel traffic are variables affecting mixed detections of humpback dolphins. Acoustic detections for finless porpoises are most influenced by distance from shore and depth. Our findings highlight the importance of considering species-specific variations in acoustic and visual detectability when designing integrated surveys for multiple species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.