Baited Remote Underwater Video surveys undercount sharks at high densities: insights from full-spherical camera technologies

Kilfoil, JP; Wirsing, AJ; Campbell, D. M.; Kiszka, Jérémy J.; Gastrich, KR; Heithaus, Michael R.; Zhang, Y.; Bond, ME

doi:10.3354/meps12395

Cited by 31 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, BRUVS are considered to have minimal negative effects on the target population, sampling location, or environment (Whitmarsh et al ., ). Furthermore, BRUVS can be more resource efficient and cost effective per replicate than maintaining fishing surveys, can detect animals that would otherwise be excluded by the selectivity of fishing gears and generate a permanent record of fishes present including an ethogram of behaviours (Brooks et al ., ; Kilfoil et al ., ). The use of BRUVS is not without shortcomings.…”

Section: Field Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ethical considerations in fish research

Sloman

Bouyoucos

Brooks

et al. 2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fishes are used in a wide range of scientific studies, from conservation research with potential benefits to the species used to biomedical research with potential human benefits. Fish research can take place in both laboratories and field environments and methods used represent a continuum from non‐invasive observations, handling, through to experimental manipulation. While some countries have legislation or guidance regarding the use of fish in research, many do not and there exists a diversity of scientific opinions on the sentience of fish and how we determine welfare. Nevertheless, there is a growing pressure on the scientific community to take more responsibility for the animals they work with through maximising the benefits of their research to humans or animals while minimising welfare or survival costs to their study animals. In this review, we focus primarily on the refinement of common methods used in fish research based on emerging knowledge with the aim of improving the welfare of fish used in scientific studies. We consider the use of anaesthetics and analgesics and how we mark individuals for identification purposes. We highlight the main ethical concerns facing researchers in both laboratory and field environments and identify areas that need urgent future research. We hope that this review will help inform those who wish to refine their ethical practices and stimulate thought among fish researchers for further avenues of refinement. Improved ethics and welfare of fishes will inevitably lead to increased scientific rigour and is in the best interests of both fishes and scientists.

show abstract

Section: Field Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…selectivity of fishing gears and generate a permanent record of fishes present including an ethogram of behavioursKilfoil et al, 2017). The use of BRUVS is not without shortcomings.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical considerations in fish research

Sloman

Bouyoucos

Brooks

et al. 2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Species assignments were made following Randall and Cea (2010) Acuña-Marrero et al, 2018). MaxN is a conservative measurement of relative abundance that avoids any error associated with recounting the same fish (Cappo, Harvey, Malcom, & Speare, 2003;Priede, Bagley, Smith, Creasey, & Merrett, 1994;Willis, Millar, & Babcock, 2003); however, it usually underestimates the real abundance in a single deployment (Kilfoil et al, 2017). By including any other individual that was undoubtedly distinguishable within the deployment and that was not already included in the MaxN calculation, cMaxN tends to solve, in part, the underestimation problem of sampled species.…”

Section: Sample Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial and seasonal differences in the top predators of Easter Island: Essential data for implementing the new Rapa Nui multiple‐uses marine protected area

Morales

Easton

Friedlander

et al. 2019

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reef fishes are an important component of marine biodiversity, and changes in the composition of the assemblage structure may indicate ecological, climatic, or anthropogenic disturbances. To examine spatial differences in the reef fish assemblage structure around Easter Island, eight sites were sampled during autumn and summer 2016–2017 with baited remote underwater video systems. To determine seasonal changes, quarterly (seasonal) sampling was conducted at five of those eight sites. Fifteen pelagic species of fishes were recorded during this study, some of which have not previously been recorded in scuba surveys, including the Galapagos shark (Carcharhinus galapagensis, Snodgrass & Heller, 1905) and tunas (Scrombidae). Significant spatial and seasonal differences were found in the fish assemblage. Fish assemblages from the south coast differed significantly from those along the west and east coasts, mainly due to the occurrence of top predators. Winter differed from other seasons, especially along the south coast where the island is more exposed to large oceanic swells and winds from Antarctica. Owing to the variety and high relative abundance of species recorded during this survey, baited remote underwater video systems seemed to be an effective method for studying top predators at Easter Island. The identification of priority zones for the protection of top predator species represents an important contribution of this study, in order to develop management and conservation strategies to be implemented in the newly created Rapa Nui multiple uses coastal marine protected areas.

show abstract

“…This allows for precise deployment location on high-precision habitat maps produced from multibeam echosounder (Textbox 1) surveys, such as those available from Simrad or BioSonics. The application of full-spherical camera technology in marine environments has begun in earnest and is showing promise in resolving issues of repeat counts as well as biases in detection probability, relationships with true abundance, and relationships between fish and their environments (Kilfoil et al 2017;Campbell et al 2018).…”

Section: Textbox 1 Jargon Quick Referencementioning

confidence: 99%