Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video
Background Assessing fish assemblages in subtidal and intertidal habitats is challenging due to the structural complexity of many of these systems. Trapping and collecting are regarded as optimal ways to sample these assemblages, but this method is costly and destructive, so researchers also use vid...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
PeerJ Inc.
2023-05-01
|
| Series: | PeerJ |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://peerj.com/articles/15426.pdf |
| _version_ | 1797419938457059328 |
|---|---|
| author | Katherine R. Erickson Ana B. Bugnot Will F. Figueira |
| author_facet | Katherine R. Erickson Ana B. Bugnot Will F. Figueira |
| author_sort | Katherine R. Erickson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background Assessing fish assemblages in subtidal and intertidal habitats is challenging due to the structural complexity of many of these systems. Trapping and collecting are regarded as optimal ways to sample these assemblages, but this method is costly and destructive, so researchers also use video techniques. Underwater visual census and baited remote underwater video stations are commonly used to characterise fish communities in these systems. More passive techniques such as remote underwater video (RUV) may be more appropriate for behavioural studies, or for comparing proximal habitats where the broad attraction caused by bait plumes could be an issue. However, data processing for RUVs can be time consuming and create processing bottlenecks. Methods Here, we identified the optimal subsampling method to assess fish assemblages on intertidal oyster reefs using RUV footage and bootstrapping techniques. We quantified how video subsampling effort and method (systematic vs random) affect the accuracy and precision of three different fish assemblage metrics; species richness and two proxies for the total abundance of fish, MaxNT and MeanCountT, which have not been evaluated previously for complex intertidal habitats. Results Results suggest that MaxNT and species richness should be recorded in real time, whereas optimal sampling for MeanCountT is every 60 s. Systematic sampling proved to be more accurate and precise than random sampling. This study provides valuable methodology recommendations which are relevant for the use of RUV to assess fish assemblages in a variety of shallow intertidal habitats. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T06:54:25Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b0648220a8754b2fafdf41e8c6be2312 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2167-8359 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T06:54:25Z |
| publishDate | 2023-05-01 |
| publisher | PeerJ Inc. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PeerJ |
| spelling | doaj.art-b0648220a8754b2fafdf41e8c6be23122023-12-03T10:08:15ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592023-05-0111e1542610.7717/peerj.15426Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater videoKatherine R. Erickson0Ana B. Bugnot1Will F. Figueira2Centre for Marine Science and Innovation, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaBackground Assessing fish assemblages in subtidal and intertidal habitats is challenging due to the structural complexity of many of these systems. Trapping and collecting are regarded as optimal ways to sample these assemblages, but this method is costly and destructive, so researchers also use video techniques. Underwater visual census and baited remote underwater video stations are commonly used to characterise fish communities in these systems. More passive techniques such as remote underwater video (RUV) may be more appropriate for behavioural studies, or for comparing proximal habitats where the broad attraction caused by bait plumes could be an issue. However, data processing for RUVs can be time consuming and create processing bottlenecks. Methods Here, we identified the optimal subsampling method to assess fish assemblages on intertidal oyster reefs using RUV footage and bootstrapping techniques. We quantified how video subsampling effort and method (systematic vs random) affect the accuracy and precision of three different fish assemblage metrics; species richness and two proxies for the total abundance of fish, MaxNT and MeanCountT, which have not been evaluated previously for complex intertidal habitats. Results Results suggest that MaxNT and species richness should be recorded in real time, whereas optimal sampling for MeanCountT is every 60 s. Systematic sampling proved to be more accurate and precise than random sampling. This study provides valuable methodology recommendations which are relevant for the use of RUV to assess fish assemblages in a variety of shallow intertidal habitats.https://peerj.com/articles/15426.pdfCryptic fishIntertidal reefSampling effortUnbaited underwater camera |
| spellingShingle | Katherine R. Erickson Ana B. Bugnot Will F. Figueira Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video PeerJ Cryptic fish Intertidal reef Sampling effort Unbaited underwater camera |
| title | Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video |
| title_full | Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video |
| title_fullStr | Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video |
| title_full_unstemmed | Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video |
| title_short | Optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video |
| title_sort | optimising sampling of fish assemblages on intertidal reefs using remote underwater video |
| topic | Cryptic fish Intertidal reef Sampling effort Unbaited underwater camera |
| url | https://peerj.com/articles/15426.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT katherinererickson optimisingsamplingoffishassemblagesonintertidalreefsusingremoteunderwatervideo AT anabbugnot optimisingsamplingoffishassemblagesonintertidalreefsusingremoteunderwatervideo AT willffigueira optimisingsamplingoffishassemblagesonintertidalreefsusingremoteunderwatervideo |