Electronic tracking tag programming is critical to data collection for behavioral time‐series analysis

Electronic tracking tags are major tools of ecological research and management, but programming sophisticated tags can be challenging. We discovered that a common programming scheme can negatively affect the quality of tracks collected by Argos tags. Here we describe the problem and how it occurred. We then simulated a series of tracks with different data collection schemes to investigate how spatial precision and temporal frequency affect the overall quality of tracking data. Tracks were simulated using a two-state composite correlated random walk (CCRW). Tracks were simulated with two spatial scales, using parameters estimated from northern elephant seal (large scale) and California sea lion (small scale) tracking data. Onto each simulated track, observations of varying precision, frequency, and censoring were imposed. We then fit the CCRW in a state-space model (SSM) to the simulated observations in order to assess how data quality and frequency affected recovery of known behavioral state and location. We show that when movement scales are small, regular observations were critical to recover behavior and location. In addition, tracks with frequent regular locations (increasing N) overcame low spatial accuracy (e.g., Argos) to detect small-scale movement patterns, suggesting frequently collected Argos locations may be as good as infrequently collected GPS in some circumstances. From these results and our experience tracking animals generally, we produce a set of guidelines for those manufacturing, programming, and deploying electronic tracking tags to maximize the utility of the data they produce.

[1]  B. Manly,et al.  Resource selection by animals: statistical design and analysis for field studies. , 1994 .

[2]  Carey E. Kuhn,et al.  Advances in the tracking of marine species: using GPS locations to evaluate satellite track data and a continuous-time movement model , 2009 .

[3]  M. A. Fedak,et al.  Variations in behavior and condition of a Southern Ocean top predator in relation to in situ oceanographic conditions , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  Ian D. Jonsen,et al.  ROBUST STATE-SPACE MODELING OF ANIMAL MOVEMENT DATA , 2005 .

[5]  Corey J A Bradshaw,et al.  Measurement error causes scale-dependent threshold erosion of biological signals in animal movement data. , 2007, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[6]  P. Moorcroft,et al.  Mechanistic home range analysis , 2006 .

[7]  Corey J. A. Bradshaw,et al.  Why do Argos satellite tags deployed on marine animals stop transmitting , 2007 .

[8]  Gary C. White,et al.  Autocorrelation of location estimates and the analysis of radiotracking data , 1999 .

[9]  Daniel P. Costa,et al.  FORAGING ECOLOGY OF NORTHERN ELEPHANT SEALS , 2000 .

[10]  Daniel P. Costa,et al.  Accuracy of ARGOS Locations of Pinnipeds at-Sea Estimated Using Fastloc GPS , 2010, PloS one.

[11]  Bernie J. McConnell,et al.  The effects of interpolation error and location quality on animal track reconstruction , 2009 .

[12]  M. Hindell,et al.  Using GPS data to evaluate the accuracy of state-space methods for correction of Argos satellite telemetry error. , 2010, Ecology.

[13]  Ransom A. Myers,et al.  Identification of high‐use habitat and threats to leatherback sea turtles in northern waters: new directions for conservation , 2005 .

[14]  Horst Bornemann,et al.  Biologging in the global ocean observing system , 2010 .

[15]  Martin Wikelski,et al.  Going wild: what a global small-animal tracking system could do for experimental biologists , 2007, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[16]  B. Worton Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies , 1989 .

[17]  Lucas N Joppa,et al.  Understanding movement data and movement processes: current and emerging directions. , 2008, Ecology letters.

[18]  Bernie J. McConnell,et al.  ASSESSMENT OF ARGOS LOCATION ACCURACY FROM SATELLITE TAGS DEPLOYED ON CAPTIVE GRAY SEALS , 2002 .

[19]  E. Revilla,et al.  A movement ecology paradigm for unifying organismal movement research , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[20]  Brent S. Stewart,et al.  Double Migrations of the Northern Elephant Seal, Mirounga angustirostris , 1995 .

[21]  Greg A Breed,et al.  Sex-specific, seasonal foraging tactics of adult grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) revealed by state-space analysis. , 2009, Ecology.

[22]  D. Costa,et al.  Migratory shearwaters integrate oceanic resources across the Pacific Ocean in an endless summer , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  O. Ovaskainen,et al.  State-space models of individual animal movement. , 2008, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[24]  Bernie J. McConnell,et al.  PHONING HOME‐A NEW GSM MOBILE PHONE TELEMETRY SYSTEM TO COLLECT MARK‐RECAPTURE DATA , 2004 .

[25]  H. Weimerskirch,et al.  Satellite tracking of Wandering albatrosses , 1990, Nature.