27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for mark-resight nesting population estimation of adult female green sea turtles at Raine Island

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Nester abundance is a key measure of the performance of the world’s largest green turtle rookery at Raine Island, Australia, and has been estimated by mark-resight counts since 1984. Nesters are first marked by painting their carapace with a longitudinal white stripe. Painted and unpainted turtles are then counted by a surface observer on a small boat in waters adjacent to the reef. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and underwater video may provide more cost-effective and less biased alternatives to this approach, but estimates must be comparable with historical estimates. Here we compare and evaluate the three methods. We found comparatively little variation in resighting probabilities between consecutive days of sampling or time of day, which supports an underlying assumption of the method (i.e. demographic closure during sampling). This lack of bias in the location availability for detection of painted versus unpainted turtles and further supported by a parallel satellite tracking study of 40 turtles at Raine Island. Our results demonstrated that surface observers consistently reported higher proportions of marked turtles than either the UAV or underwater video method. This in turn yielded higher population estimates with UAV or underwater video compared to the historical surface observer method, which suggested correction factors of 1.53 and 1.73 respectively. We attributed this to observer search error because a white marked turtle is easier to spot than the non-marked turtle. In contrast, the UAV and underwater video methods allowed subsequent frame-by-frame review, thus reducing observer search error. UAVs were the most efficient in terms of survey time, personnel commitment and weather tolerance compared to the other methods. However, underwater video may also be a useful alternative for in-water mark-resight surveys of turtles.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Environmental Warming and Feminization of One of the Largest Sea Turtle Populations in the World

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Estimating Snow Leopard Population Abundance Using Photography and Capture–Recapture Techniques

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Global Analysis of Anthropogenic Debris Ingestion by Sea Turtles

              Ingestion of marine debris can have lethal and sublethal effects on sea turtles and other wildlife. Although researchers have reported on ingestion of anthropogenic debris by marine turtles and implied incidences of debris ingestion have increased over time, there has not been a global synthesis of the phenomenon since 1985. Thus, we analyzed 37 studies published from 1985 to 2012 that report on data collected from before 1900 through 2011. Specifically, we investigated whether ingestion prevalence has changed over time, what types of debris are most commonly ingested, the geographic distribution of debris ingestion by marine turtles relative to global debris distribution, and which species and life-history stages are most likely to ingest debris. The probability of green (Chelonia mydas) and leatherback turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) ingesting debris increased significantly over time, and plastic was the most commonly ingested debris. Turtles in nearly all regions studied ingest debris, but the probability of ingestion was not related to modeled debris densities. Furthermore, smaller, oceanic-stage turtles were more likely to ingest debris than coastal foragers, whereas carnivorous species were less likely to ingest debris than herbivores or gelatinovores. Our results indicate oceanic leatherback turtles and green turtles are at the greatest risk of both lethal and sublethal effects from ingested marine debris. To reduce this risk, anthropogenic debris must be managed at a global level. Análisis Global de la Ingesta de Residuos Antropogénicos por Tortugas Marinas La ingesta de residuos marinos puede tener efectos letales y subletales sobre las tortugas marinas y otros animales. Aunque hay investigadores que han reportado la ingesta de residuos antropogénicos por tortugas marinas y la incidencia de la ingesta de residuos ha incrementado con el tiempo, no ha habido una síntesis global del fenómeno desde 1985. Por esto analizamos 37 estudios publicados, desde 1985 hasta 2012, que reportan datos colectados desde antes de 1900 y a lo largo del 2011. Investigamos específicamente si el predominio de la ingesta ha cambiado con el tiempo, qué tipos de residuos se ingieren comúnmente, la distribución geográfica de la ingesta de residuos por tortugas marinas en relación a la distribución global de residuos y cuáles especies y etapas de vida tienen más probabilidad de ingerir residuos. La probabilidad de que las tortugas verdes (Chelonia mydas) y laúd (Dermochelys coriacea) ingieran escombros incrementa significativamente con el tiempo; plástico fue el residuo que más se ingirió. Las tortugas en casi todas las regiones estudiadas ingieren residuos, pero la probabilidad de ingesta no estuvo relacionada con las densidades modeladas de residuos. Además de esto, tortugas más pequeñas, en etapa oceánica de vida, tuvieron una mayor probabilidad de ingerir residuos que las tortugas forrajeras terrestres, mientras que las especies carnívoras tuvieron menos probabilidad de ingerir residuos que las herbívoras o las gelatinívoras. Nuestros resultados indican que las tortugas verdes y laúd tienen el mayor riesgo de efectos letales y subletales de la ingesta de residuos marinos. Para reducir el riesgo, los residuos antropogénicos deben manejarse en un nivel global.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: Data curationRole: Investigation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Software
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Methodology
                Role: Formal analysisRole: ValidationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                4 June 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 6
                : e0228524
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Queensland Department of Environment and Science, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
                [2 ] Biopixel Oceans Foundation, James Cook University, Smithfield, Queensland, Australia
                [3 ] Queensland Department of Natural Resources Mines and Energy, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
                Deakin University, AUSTRALIA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3976-5030
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8285-7259
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3349-1841
                Article
                PONE-D-20-01406
                10.1371/journal.pone.0228524
                7272060
                32497041
                c9241fd7-7f82-4f12-9d1a-a69b60881263
                © 2020 Dunstan et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 16 January 2020
                : 6 May 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 9, Tables: 3, Pages: 18
                Funding
                The authors received no specific funding for this work.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Vertebrates
                Amniotes
                Reptiles
                Testudines
                Turtles
                Earth Sciences
                Geomorphology
                Topography
                Landforms
                Islands
                Earth Sciences
                Marine and Aquatic Sciences
                Reefs
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Survey Research
                Survey Methods
                Physical Sciences
                Materials Science
                Materials
                Coating Materials
                Paints
                Earth Sciences
                Geomorphology
                Topography
                Landforms
                Beaches
                Engineering and Technology
                Equipment
                Optical Equipment
                Cameras
                Earth Sciences
                Seasons
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article