Acoustic detection rate can outperform traditional survey approaches in estimating relative densities of breeding waders

IF 1.8 3区 生物学 Q1 ORNITHOLOGY
Ibis Pub Date : 2024-11-05 DOI:10.1111/ibi.13375
David Jarrett, Stephen G. Willis
{"title":"Acoustic detection rate can outperform traditional survey approaches in estimating relative densities of breeding waders","authors":"David Jarrett,&nbsp;Stephen G. Willis","doi":"10.1111/ibi.13375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Passive acoustic devices are increasingly being used to monitor biodiversity. However, few studies have compared the accuracy of acoustic surveys and traditional surveys against ground-truthed data. Here, we assess whether acoustic recorders used in conjunction with an artificial intelligence (AI) classifier can predict the relative breeding density of four wader species better than traditional fieldworker transect surveys. In a 27-km<sup>2</sup> upland study site, acoustic data were collected at 83 sampling points and analysed using the BirdNet bird-sound classifier to estimate vocal detection rate at each location; we also carried out concurrent transect bird surveys. To ground-truth these approaches, intensive field surveys were undertaken to identify each breeding territory of our focal species. With both the acoustic dataset and the transect dataset, we used similar analytical approaches (random forest regression trees) to predict relative territory density across the study site, and then compared these predictions with the territory density obtained from the intensive field surveys. The classifier performed well at identifying the presence of target species' vocalizations within 3-s periods for Lapwing (accuracy = 0.911), Curlew (0.826) and Oystercatcher (0.841), but less well for Golden Plover (0.699). For Curlew and Oystercatcher, the predictions obtained from the acoustic approach were a better fit to actual territory density than the transect approach. In contrast, for Lapwing and Golden Plover, the transect predictions outperformed the acoustic predictions, with the acoustic model particularly poor for Golden Plover. We attributed these differences to the performance of the classifier, species' ecology and vocal behaviour. Data gathering for the acoustic approach was more time-efficient than the transect surveys, requiring less than a quarter of the fieldworker days. We conclude that there is high potential for acoustic approaches to augment traditional methods, although species' ecological characteristics should be considered: species that vocalize more frequently, at higher amplitudes and hold larger territories will be better-suited to sampling-based acoustic methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":13254,"journal":{"name":"Ibis","volume":"167 2","pages":"562-574"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ibi.13375","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ibis","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ibi.13375","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORNITHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Passive acoustic devices are increasingly being used to monitor biodiversity. However, few studies have compared the accuracy of acoustic surveys and traditional surveys against ground-truthed data. Here, we assess whether acoustic recorders used in conjunction with an artificial intelligence (AI) classifier can predict the relative breeding density of four wader species better than traditional fieldworker transect surveys. In a 27-km2 upland study site, acoustic data were collected at 83 sampling points and analysed using the BirdNet bird-sound classifier to estimate vocal detection rate at each location; we also carried out concurrent transect bird surveys. To ground-truth these approaches, intensive field surveys were undertaken to identify each breeding territory of our focal species. With both the acoustic dataset and the transect dataset, we used similar analytical approaches (random forest regression trees) to predict relative territory density across the study site, and then compared these predictions with the territory density obtained from the intensive field surveys. The classifier performed well at identifying the presence of target species' vocalizations within 3-s periods for Lapwing (accuracy = 0.911), Curlew (0.826) and Oystercatcher (0.841), but less well for Golden Plover (0.699). For Curlew and Oystercatcher, the predictions obtained from the acoustic approach were a better fit to actual territory density than the transect approach. In contrast, for Lapwing and Golden Plover, the transect predictions outperformed the acoustic predictions, with the acoustic model particularly poor for Golden Plover. We attributed these differences to the performance of the classifier, species' ecology and vocal behaviour. Data gathering for the acoustic approach was more time-efficient than the transect surveys, requiring less than a quarter of the fieldworker days. We conclude that there is high potential for acoustic approaches to augment traditional methods, although species' ecological characteristics should be considered: species that vocalize more frequently, at higher amplitudes and hold larger territories will be better-suited to sampling-based acoustic methods.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ibis
Ibis 生物-鸟类学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
9.50%
发文量
118
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: IBIS publishes original papers, reviews, short communications and forum articles reflecting the forefront of international research activity in ornithological science, with special emphasis on the behaviour, ecology, evolution and conservation of birds. IBIS aims to publish as rapidly as is consistent with the requirements of peer-review and normal publishing constraints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信