ArticlePloS one2026
Observations of marine animal interactions with a small tidal turbine.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The risk of collisions between animals and operating tidal turbines remains a concern in the scientific and regulatory communities. A sensor package including optical cameras was deployed to monitor animal interactions with a small-scale (1 m2) cross-flow tidal turbine. The turbine was deployed in Washington State, USA for 141 days at a site with peak flow speeds of 2.5 m/s. We analyze optical camera imagery spanning 109 days of turbine operation. The analyzed images contain 1044 observations of fish, fish schools, seabirds, or seals in the vicinity of the turbine. No instances of collision with seabirds or seals were observed. Seabirds were only observed during daylight hours and while the turbine was stationary. Both seals and fish were observed during both day and night and while the turbine was stationary and rotating. Four fish were observed colliding with the moving turbine and in all but one case the animals swam away following the collision. Over the same period of time, over fifty times more fish (224 individual fish and 5 fish schools) were observed passing the moving turbine without collision. Fish encounters were likely under counted due to the difficulty in discerning small fish from plant matter in the water column. These observations represent the first optical camera imagery showing fish, bird, and marine mammal interactions with a tidal turbine in North America. In addition to quantitative and qualitative discussion of the implications of our observations for collision risk, we discuss lessons learned on sampling schemes and deployment of machine learning for detection of animals to inform future data collection strategies in future monitoring campaigns.
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.