Search and foraging behaviors from movement data: A comparison of methods.
Search and foraging behaviors from movement data: A comparison of methods.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ece3.3593
复制
发表时间：
2018-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Jessopp M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bennison A;Bearhop S;Bodey TW;Votier SC;Grecian WJ;Wakefield ED;Hamer KC;Jessopp M
搜索行为通常用作动物运动研究中觅食的代理，目的地只是觅食过程的一部分，这也包括捕食捕获的方法，而许多研究仅依赖于对行为的行为注释。动物运动数据以识别捕获捕获的尝试。行为注释方法是从北部巨人（Morus bassanus）的GPS轨道识别搜索行为，并将输出与简单部署时间 - 深度记录记录的潜水的出现进行了比较。潜水事件。大多数成功的潜水都在确定为搜索的区域内。 ，在没有潜水的情况下，识别较少的搜索区域。最小化假阳性和假否定性的数量。一种适用于要解决的研究问题或建立的物种管理框架的行为注释方法。
Search behavior is often used as a proxy for foraging effort within studies of animal movement, despite it being only one part of the foraging process, which also includes prey capture. While methods for validating prey capture exist, many studies rely solely on behavioral annotation of animal movement data to identify search and infer prey capture attempts. However, the degree to which search correlates with prey capture is largely untested. This study applied seven behavioral annotation methods to identify search behavior from GPS tracks of northern gannets (Morus bassanus), and compared outputs to the occurrence of dives recorded by simultaneously deployed time–depth recorders. We tested how behavioral annotation methods vary in their ability to identify search behavior leading to dive events. There was considerable variation in the number of dives occurring within search areas across methods. Hidden Markov models proved to be the most successful, with 81% of all dives occurring within areas identified as search. k‐Means clustering and first passage time had the highest rates of dives occurring outside identified search behavior. First passage time and hidden Markov models had the lowest rates of false positives, identifying fewer search areas with no dives. All behavioral annotation methods had advantages and drawbacks in terms of the complexity of analysis and ability to reflect prey capture events while minimizing the number of false positives and false negatives. We used these results, with consideration of analytical difficulty, to provide advice on the most appropriate methods for use where prey capture behavior is not available. This study highlights a need to critically assess and carefully choose a behavioral annotation method suitable for the research question being addressed, or resulting species management frameworks established.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
Clark, JS
通讯作者：
Clark, JS
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Byrne, Michael E.;Chamberlain, Michael J.
通讯作者：
Chamberlain, Michael J.
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Dias, Maria P.;Granadeiro, Jose P.;Palmeirim, Jorge M.
通讯作者：
Palmeirim, Jorge M.
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Anderson, CR;Lindzey, FG
通讯作者：
Lindzey, FG
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
Elith, J.;Leathwick, J. R.;Hastie, T.
通讯作者：
Hastie, T.