Advertisement

Marine Biology

, 164:180 | Cite as

Extreme passive acoustic telemetry detection variability on a mesophotic coral reef, United States Virgin Islands

  • Jonathan JossartEmail author
  • Richard S. Nemeth
  • Avram Primack
  • Robert Stolz
Original paper

Abstract

Understanding passive acoustic telemetry equipment limitations is critical for correctly interpreting movements of aquatic animals. Range test studies have been performed to determine what environmental factors may interfere with acoustic equipment efficiency. Many of these studies have been performed on shallow coral reef environments for a few days to weeks. This study examined environmental factors that influence detection variability on a mesophotic coral reef south of St. Thomas, United States Virgin Islands (−64.96°, 18.19°). Data from a stationary transmitter were examined against numerous environmental variables from June to September 2011. A generalized linear model was used to examine the daily detection proportion response to eight different environmental variables. Factors which had strong negative effects on detections received included when the current direction was flowing from receiver to transmitter, current speeds above 0.2 ms−1, a strong temperature gradient between transmitter and receiver, and increased water temperature. Detections varied throughout the different time periods of the day with sunset and sunrise having significantly lower detections than day, and sunset having significantly lower detections than night. The results highlight the importance of conducting a long-term range test and will aid design of future passive acoustic telemetry studies on mesophotic coral reefs.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Tyler Smith for providing long-term temperature and current data. Funding for the acoustic array was provided by the following Grants: Puerto Rico Sea Grant (#R-31-1-06), NOAA Saltonstall-Kennedy Program (#NA09NMF4270068), Virgin Islands Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (VI-EPSCoR #NSF-814417) and the Guy Harvey Research Institute. The Lana Vento Charitable Trust provided funds for research materials. Two reviewers provided excellent comments regarding the data analysis and interpretation of results. This is contribution number 177 to the University of the Virgin Islands Center for Marine and Environmental Studies.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interests are declared.

References

  1. Au WW, Hastings MC (2008) Principles of marine bioacoustics. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Battista T, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2015) Water depth and acoustic backscatter data collected from NOAA Ship Nancy Foster in Caribbean Sea, South of St. John and St. Thomas and Buck Island, St. Croix, US Virgin Islands from 2005-02-01 to 2005-02-12 (NCEI Accession 0131860). Version 2.2. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Dataset. Accessed 27 Sept 2016Google Scholar
  3. Bertelsen RD, Hornbeck J (2009) Using acoustic tagging to determine adult spiny lobster (Panulirus argus) movement patterns in the western sambo ecological reserve Florida, United States. NZ J Mar Freshw Res 43:35–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggs C, Nemeth RS (2016) Spatial and temporal movement patterns of two snapper species at multi-species spawning aggregation. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 558:129–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brockwell PJ, Davis RA (2002) Introduction to time series and forecasting, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cagua EF, Berumen ML, Tyler EHM (2013) Topography and biological noise determine acoustic detectability on coral reefs. Coral Reef 32:1123–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cato DH (1978) Marine biological choruses observed in tropical waters near Australia. Acoust Soc Am 64:736–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cotton CF (2010) Factors affecting reception range of ultrasonic tags in a Georgia Estuary. Mar Technol Soc J 44:17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dagorn L, Holland KN, Itano DG (2007) Behavior of yellowfin (Thunnus albacares) and bigeye (T. obesus) tuna in a network of fish aggregating devices (FADs). Mar Biol 151:595–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. How JR, de Lestang S (2012) Acoustic tracking: issues affecting design, analysis and interpretation of data from movement studies. Mar Freshw Res 63:312–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huveneers C, Simpfendorfer CA, Kim S, Semmens JM, Hobday AJ, Pederson H, Stieglitz T, Vallee R, Webber D, Heupel MR, Peddemors V (2016) The influence of environmental parameters on the performance and detection range of acoustic receivers. Methods Ecol Evol 7:825–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaplan MB, Mooney TA, Partan J, Solow AR (2015) Coral reef species assemblages are associated with ambient soundscapes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 533:93–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kessel ST, Cooke SJ, Heupel MR, Hussey NE, Simpfendorfer CA, Vagle S, Fisk AT (2013) A review of detection range testing in aquatic passive acoustic telemetry studies. Rev Fish Biol Fish 24:199–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mathies NH, Ogburn MB, McFall G, Fangman S (2014) Environmental interference factors affecting detection range in acoustic telemetry studies using fixed receiver arrays. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 495:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Myers R (1994) Classical and modern regression with applications, 2nd edn. PWS-KENT, BostonGoogle Scholar
  16. Nemeth RS (2012) Ecosystem aspects of species that aggregate to spawn. In: Sadovy Y, Colin PL (eds) Reef fish spawning aggregations: biology, research and management. Springer, Amsterdam, pp 21–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Payne NL, Gillanders BM, Webber DM, Semmens JM (2010) Interpreting diel activity patterns from acoustic telemetry: the need for controls. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 419:295–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pickard AE, Vaudo JJ, Wetherbee BM, Nemeth RS, Blondeau JB, Kadison EA, Shivji MS (2016) Comparative use of a Caribbean mesophotic reef and of interactions with fish spawning aggregations for three species of shark. PLoS One 11:e0151221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Preisig JC (2005) Performance analysis of adaptive equalization for coherent acoustic communications in the time-varying ocean environment. J Acoust Soc Am 118:263–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Preisig J (2007) Acoustic propagation considerations for underwater acoustic communications network development. ACM SIGMOBILE Mob Comput and Commun Rev 11:2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Radford CA, Jeffs AG, Tindle CT, Montgomery JC (2008) Temporal patterns in ambient noise of biological origin from a shallow water temperate reef. Oecologia 156:921–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rhodes KL, Nemeth RS, Kadison E, Joseph E (2014) Spatial, temporal and environmental dynamics of a multi-species epinephelid spawning aggregation in Pohnpei, Micronesia. Coral Reef 33:765–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rowell TJ, Nemeth RS, Appeldoorn RS, Schärer MT (2015) Fish sound production and acoustic telemetry reveal behaviors and spatial patterns associated with spawning aggregations of two Caribbean groupers. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 518:239–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schielzeth H (2010) Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients. Methods Ecol Evol 1:103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Selby T, Hart K, Fujisaki I, Smith B, Pollock C, Hillis-Starr Z, Lundgren I, Oli M (2016) Can you hear me now? Range-testing a submerged passive acoustic receiver array in a Caribbean coral reef habitat. Ecol Evol 6:4823–4835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shroyer SM, Logsdon DE (2009) Detection distances of selected radio and acoustic tags in Minnesota lakes and rivers. North Am J Fish Manag 29:876–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Siderius M, Porter MB, Hursky P, McDonald V (2007) Effects of ocean thermocline variability on noncoherent underwater acoustic communications. Acoust Soc Am 121:1895–1908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Siegel S, Castellan NJ Jr (1988) Non parametric statistics for the behavioural sciences. MacGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Singh L, Downey NJ, Roberts MJ, Webber DM, Smale MJ, Van den Berg MA, Harding RT, Engelbrecht DC, Blows BM (2009) Design and calibration of an acoustic telemetry system subject to upwelling events. Afr J Mar Sci 31:355–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith T, Blondeau J, Nemeth R, Pittman S, Calnan J, Kadison E, Grass J (2010) Benthic structure and cryptic mortality in a Caribbean mesophotic coral reef bank system, the Hind Bank Marine Conservation District, US Virgin Islands. Coral Reef 29:289–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Staaterman E, Rice AN, Mann DA, Paris CB (2013) Soundscapes from a tropical eastern Pacific reef and a Caribbean Sea reef. Coral Reef 32:553–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Staaterman E, Paris CB, DeFerrari HA, Mann DA, Rice AN, D’Alessandro EK (2014) Celestial patterns in marine soundscapes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 508:17–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Starr RM, Heine JN, Johnson KA (2000) Techniques for tagging and tracking deepwater rockfishes. N Am J Fish Manag 20:597–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stocks JR, Gray CA, Taylor MD (2014) Testing the effects of near-shore environmental variables on acoustic detections: implications on telemetry array design and data interpretation. Mar Technol Soc J 48:28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. R Core Team (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 13 Oct 2016
  36. Urick RJ (1983) Principles of underwater sound for engineers, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Vemco (2014) Vemco range test, software version 1.9.22.0. Amirax Systems, Bedford, Nova Scotia, CAGoogle Scholar
  38. Welsh JQ, Fox RJ, Webber DM, Bellwood DF (2012) Performance of remote acoustic receivers within a coral reef habitat: implications for array design. Coral Reef 31:693–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Marine and Environmental StudiesUniversity of the Virgin IslandsSt. ThomasUSA
  2. 2.School of Public and Environmental AffairsIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  3. 3.College of Science and MathUniversity of the Virgin IslandsSt. ThomasUSA

Personalised recommendations