Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A plea for standards in reporting data collected by animal-borne electronic devices

A plea for standards in reporting data collected by animal-borne electronic devices In recent years, there has been significant investment in collaborative e-infrastructures to support biotelemetry research. Whilst these e-infrastructures are rapidly growing in size and sophistication, the current lack of standards for reporting and documenting the data collected by animal-borne telemetry devices is hampering their effectiveness. Here, we demonstrate why the current lack of standards is severely complicating the process for those developing and maintaining biotelemetry-related e-infrastructures, and provide suggestions as to how the current issue may be resolved. We hope this article will stimulate discussion across the community and facilitate the first steps towards the creation and adoption of industry standards for data collected by animal-borne telemetry devices. Keywords: Telemetry, Tagging, Animal, Bio-logging, Database, eResearch, Electronic tagging Background Main text The technological innovation of animal-borne telemetry The development and maintenance of these e-infra - devices is enabling an ever-increasing quantity of vari- structures require significant economic investment and ables to be recorded about an animal’s location, internal a coordinated effort to address the many political, tech - state, and external environment [1]. As such, the scope of nical, and funding challenges. A key step in the growth the research and application has broadened, substantially and sustainability of these information systems, and their increasing the volume of device deployments around the capacity to support the research community, is the ease globe [2]. At the same time, researchers seek to compile by which data can be transferred from device to reposi the resulting datasets to address questions requiring tory. The assortment of sensors now available, combined larger timescales and sample sizes than most individual with the range of methods for the automated down- studies can provide, and journals and funding agencies load of these data (ARGOS, Bluetooth, email, Iridium, are increasingly encouraging or requiring these data to be Globalstar, GSM, SMS) and the sheer number of compa- archived as part of the research process. nies producing the devices, is resulting in many different To support this general trend across natural resource attribute names, definitions, units, and file formats for management and scientific communities, a number of reporting the same types of data. For example, differ - e-infrastructures have appeared in recent years to help ent manufacturers currently report the time and date in researchers manage, analyse, archive, and share the data numerous disparate formats (e.g. dd/MM/yyyy h:mm; collected by animal-borne telemetry devices (Table  1). h:mm:ss.s MM.dd.yyyy; yyyy.MM.dd hh:mm:ss; yyyy- These e-infrastructures assure the permanence and MM-dd hh:mm:ss.s, etc.). In some cases, data files and integrity of these data for future use and enable scientists documentation provide no reference to the time zone, to share data within and between disciplines [3–7]. even when allowing researchers to choose (and some times change on the fly) the time zone in which their data are provided. In addition, data generated by indi- vidual manufacturers can change over time, leading to outputs that misleadingly appear to be in the same for- *Correspondence: Dr.hamish.campbell@gmail.com Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin mat; for example, the development of a new device model University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia or software version that changes the units for reporting Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © 2016 Campbell et al. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/ publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Campbell et al. Anim Biotelemetry (2016) 4:1 Page 2 of 4 Table 1 The current catalogue of web-based e-infrastructures for the collation, sharing, and reuse of animal biotelemetry data Repository name Host Species Regional focus Data type Web address Australian animal tracking and Australian government Marine species Australia to Antarctica Any location and biosensor aatams.emii.org.au monitoring system data Animal telemetry network US Integrated ocean observing Marine species North America Any location and biosensor http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/ system data observing/animal_telemetry Eurodeer Fondazione Edmund Mach Ungulates Europe Any location and acceleration eurodeer.org data Great Lakes acoustic telemetry Great Lakes fishery commission Freshwater species Great lakes (North America) Any location and biosensor data.glos.us/glatos observation system (GLATOS) data (passive acoustic) Global tagging of pelagic preda- International collaboration Marine species Pacific Any location and biosensor gtopp.org tors (GTOPP) data Movebank Max Planck Institute for Orni- All species Global Any location and biosensor movebank.org thology and University of data Konstanz OBIS-SEAMAP Duke University Marine mammals, seabirds, sea Global Any location and biosensor seamap.env.duke.edu/ turtles data Ocean tracking network Dalhousie University Aquatic species North America Any location and biosensor oceantrackingnetwork.org/ data (passive acoustic) Seaturtle.org private organization Sea turtles Global Location data (Argos) seaturtle.org Global procellariiform tracking BirdLife international Seabirds Global Location data seabirdtracking.org database Wildlife tracking private organization All species Global Location data (Argos) wildlifetracking.org Wireless remote animal monitor- Swedish University of Agricul- All species Global Any location and biosensor http://www.slu.se/wram/ ing ( WRAM) tural Sciences data ZoaTrack Atlas of living Australia All species Australasia Any location data zoatrack.org Campbell et al. Anim Biotelemetry (2016) 4:1 Page 3 of 4 instantaneous ground speed without any related change (EML) from the Knowledge Network for Biocom- in data output files. Such changes may or may not be dis - plexity; the US Federal Geographic Data Committee’s covered during import to an e-infrastructure and data (FGDC) standards for geographic information (with analysis. The quality of metadata describing data output an extension for biological information); ISO 19115 varies widely—whilst some manufacturers provide thor- from the International Organization for Standardi- ough and up-to-date manuals, data for many devices zation for geographic information; and GPX (GPS lack complete written documentation defining variables, Exchange Format). units, accuracy/precision, etc., and including a history of • As a first step, we also request that individual device changes. manufacturers, if they have not done so already, pro- The resulting ambiguities in how data, and even the vide complete written documentation (metadata) same variables, are reported make it almost impossible for all variables and formats currently used by their for data upload into the repositories to be a fully auto- devices, if needed including a history of past changes mated process and are creating serious challenges for and description of how data differ between devices, those wishing to store and integrate data from multiple user-specific preferences, data access methods, or telemetry devices within a single database. All existing file formats. Such documentation does not allow for e-infrastructures are severely affected by this problem interoperability or automated integration of data into because the creation of dedicated import procedures, repository, but would minimize archiving errors and each tailored to the device, manufacturer, and model, is enable future implementation of the standards above a time-consuming and error-prone task that also requires with historical data. continual monitoring and updating as new models and manufacturers enter the research arena. The current The definition and adoption of such standards by all approach is expensive and will become increasingly manufacturers would dramatically simplify the data infeasible if manufacture proliferation and device diver- acquisition process, augmenting the willingness of bio sification continue at the current rate without globally telemetry researchers to archive their hard-won data- adopted data standards. collections; reduce data management costs, allowing Here, we request that the device manufacturers and e-infrastructures to focus on developing shared analysis scientific community take steps to develop and insti - tools; and minimize the risk of errors derived from data gate standards for the reporting and documentation of handling, enhancing data reusability. These improve data collected by an increasing plethora of animal-borne ments in how the community share and reuse data would telemetry devices. We understand that sensors differ in in turn benefit the device manufactures by placing greater design and purpose; however, we believe that most of the value on the data their devices collect to the wider scien scientifically relevant data collected can be described by tific and natural resource management communities. a finite set of variables. When stored along with informa - The definition and adoption of standards in the report tion about the sensor (manufacturer, model, etc.), shared ing of data collected by animal-borne electronic devices data standards can allow data from a wide range of sen- are the first necessary step towards a more general and sors to be properly archived and analysed together. In comprehensive set of data standards that would enhance particular, we ask that manufacturers and the research interoperability amongst the different e-infrastructures. community design and implement. The recently formed International Bio-Logging Society has made one of its goals to “standardize data protocols • Standard variable names, definitions, data types, and to make the various marine and terrestrial databases units for commonly used data attributes. interoperable”. For reasons outlined in this article, we • A standard and documented file format, such as an urge for this to be instigated at the level of device man Extensible Markup Language (XML) schema, as an ufacture and propose a dedicated workshop at the next option for receiving data. There are already widely International Bio-Logging Science Symposium, inviting accepted standards for reporting many of the vari developers from all the Animal Biotelemetry e-infra - - ables most commonly used by biotelemetry devices structures, as well as the leading device manufacturers (for example, providing timestamps in Coordinated and research scientists. Universal Time (UTC) and geographic coordinates in the WGS84 reference system). Several standards Conclusions already exist to describe ecological and geospatial We have a unique community in which researchers, soft- data that can be used as a preliminary reference, for ware developers, and manufacturers work collaboratively example: Darwin Core and ABCD from TDWG for to develop new tools to address novel reserach questions. biological collections; Ecological Metadata Language We believe we can now work together to develop the Campbell et al. Anim Biotelemetry (2016) 4:1 Page 4 of 4 2. Campbell HA, Beyer HL, Dennis TE, Dwyer RG, Forester JD, Fukuda Y, data standards needed to meet growing data archiving Lynch C, Hindell MA, Menke N, Morales JM, Richardson C, Rodgers E, requirements and enable the multi-species, long-term, Taylor G, Watts ME, Westcott DA. Finding our way: on the sharing and and continental-scale ecological studies that the research reuse of animal telemetry data in Australasia. Sci Total Environ. 2015;. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.089. community is striving towards [1, 8]. 3. Coyne MS, Godley BJ. Satellite tracking and analysis tool (STAT ): an inte- grated system for archiving, analyzing and mapping animal tracking data. Authors’ contributions Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2005;301:1–7. All authors contributed equally in the writing and proofing of this manuscript. 4. Kranstauber B, Cameron A, Weinzierl R, Fountain T, Tilak S, Wikelski M, Kays All authors read and approved the final manuscript. R. The Movebank data model for animal tracking. Environ Model Softw. 2011;26(6):834–5. Author details 5. Cagnacci F, Focardi S, Hewison AJM, Morellet N, Heurich M, Stache A, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin 2 3 Kjellander P, Linnell JDC, Mysterud A, Neteler M, Delucchi L, Ossi F, Urbano University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia. Freelance consultant, Milan, Italy. Max F. Partial migration in roe deer: migratory and resident tactics are end Planck Institute for Ornithology, Am Obstberg 1, 78315 Radolfzell, Germany. points of a behavioural gradient determined by ecological factors. Oikos. Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University 2011;120:1790–802. of Agricultural Sciences, Skogsmarksgränd, 90183 Umeå, Sweden. Depart- 6. Dwyer RG, Campbell HA, Brooking C, Brimblecombe W, Hunter J, Watts ment of Biodiversity and Molecular Ecology, Fondazione Edmund Mach, ME, Franklin CE. An open web-based system for the analysis and sharing Via Edmund Mach 1, 38010 S. Michele All’adige, Trentino, Italy. Organismic and analysis of animal tracking data. Anim Biotelemetry. 2015;3(1):1–11. and Evolutionary Biology Department, Harvard University, 26 Oxford St, Cam- 7. Dettki H, Brode M, Clegg I, Giles T, Hallgren J. Wireless remote animal bridge, MA 02138, USA. monitoring ( WRAM)—a new international database e-infrastructure for management and sharing of telemetry sensor data from fish and wildlife. Competing interests In: Ames DP, Quinn NWT, Rizzoli AE, editors. Proceedings of the 7th The authors declare that they have no competing interests. International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software, June 15–19, San Diego; 2014. p. 122–8. ISBN: 978-88-9035-744-2. Received: 3 September 2015 Accepted: 23 December 2015 8. Hussey NE, Kessel ST, Aarestrup K, Cooke SJ, Cowley PD, Fisk AT, Harcourt RG, Holland KN, Iverson SJ, Kocik JF, Mills Flemming JE, Whosiskey FG. Aquatic animal telemetry: a panoramic window into the underwater world. Science. 2015;348(6240):1255642. doi:10.1126/science.1255642. References 1. Kays R, Crofoot MC, Jetz W, Wikelski M. Terrestrial animal tracking as an eye on life and planet. Science. 2015;348(6240):aaa2478. doi:10.1126/sci- ence.aaa2478. Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central and we will help you at every step: • We accept pre-submission inquiries • Our selector tool helps you to find the most relevant journal • We provide round the clock customer support • Convenient online submission • Thorough peer review • Inclusion in PubMed and all major indexing services • Maximum visibility for your research Submit your manuscript at www.biomedcentral.com/submit http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Animal Biotelemetry Springer Journals

A plea for standards in reporting data collected by animal-borne electronic devices

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/a-plea-for-standards-in-reporting-data-collected-by-animal-borne-R6n0U6QzvS
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by Campbell et al.
Subject
Life Sciences; Animal Systematics/Taxonomy/Biogeography
eISSN
2050-3385
DOI
10.1186/s40317-015-0096-x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In recent years, there has been significant investment in collaborative e-infrastructures to support biotelemetry research. Whilst these e-infrastructures are rapidly growing in size and sophistication, the current lack of standards for reporting and documenting the data collected by animal-borne telemetry devices is hampering their effectiveness. Here, we demonstrate why the current lack of standards is severely complicating the process for those developing and maintaining biotelemetry-related e-infrastructures, and provide suggestions as to how the current issue may be resolved. We hope this article will stimulate discussion across the community and facilitate the first steps towards the creation and adoption of industry standards for data collected by animal-borne telemetry devices. Keywords: Telemetry, Tagging, Animal, Bio-logging, Database, eResearch, Electronic tagging Background Main text The technological innovation of animal-borne telemetry The development and maintenance of these e-infra - devices is enabling an ever-increasing quantity of vari- structures require significant economic investment and ables to be recorded about an animal’s location, internal a coordinated effort to address the many political, tech - state, and external environment [1]. As such, the scope of nical, and funding challenges. A key step in the growth the research and application has broadened, substantially and sustainability of these information systems, and their increasing the volume of device deployments around the capacity to support the research community, is the ease globe [2]. At the same time, researchers seek to compile by which data can be transferred from device to reposi the resulting datasets to address questions requiring tory. The assortment of sensors now available, combined larger timescales and sample sizes than most individual with the range of methods for the automated down- studies can provide, and journals and funding agencies load of these data (ARGOS, Bluetooth, email, Iridium, are increasingly encouraging or requiring these data to be Globalstar, GSM, SMS) and the sheer number of compa- archived as part of the research process. nies producing the devices, is resulting in many different To support this general trend across natural resource attribute names, definitions, units, and file formats for management and scientific communities, a number of reporting the same types of data. For example, differ - e-infrastructures have appeared in recent years to help ent manufacturers currently report the time and date in researchers manage, analyse, archive, and share the data numerous disparate formats (e.g. dd/MM/yyyy h:mm; collected by animal-borne telemetry devices (Table  1). h:mm:ss.s MM.dd.yyyy; yyyy.MM.dd hh:mm:ss; yyyy- These e-infrastructures assure the permanence and MM-dd hh:mm:ss.s, etc.). In some cases, data files and integrity of these data for future use and enable scientists documentation provide no reference to the time zone, to share data within and between disciplines [3–7]. even when allowing researchers to choose (and some times change on the fly) the time zone in which their data are provided. In addition, data generated by indi- vidual manufacturers can change over time, leading to outputs that misleadingly appear to be in the same for- *Correspondence: Dr.hamish.campbell@gmail.com Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin mat; for example, the development of a new device model University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia or software version that changes the units for reporting Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © 2016 Campbell et al. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/ publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Campbell et al. Anim Biotelemetry (2016) 4:1 Page 2 of 4 Table 1 The current catalogue of web-based e-infrastructures for the collation, sharing, and reuse of animal biotelemetry data Repository name Host Species Regional focus Data type Web address Australian animal tracking and Australian government Marine species Australia to Antarctica Any location and biosensor aatams.emii.org.au monitoring system data Animal telemetry network US Integrated ocean observing Marine species North America Any location and biosensor http://www.ioos.noaa.gov/ system data observing/animal_telemetry Eurodeer Fondazione Edmund Mach Ungulates Europe Any location and acceleration eurodeer.org data Great Lakes acoustic telemetry Great Lakes fishery commission Freshwater species Great lakes (North America) Any location and biosensor data.glos.us/glatos observation system (GLATOS) data (passive acoustic) Global tagging of pelagic preda- International collaboration Marine species Pacific Any location and biosensor gtopp.org tors (GTOPP) data Movebank Max Planck Institute for Orni- All species Global Any location and biosensor movebank.org thology and University of data Konstanz OBIS-SEAMAP Duke University Marine mammals, seabirds, sea Global Any location and biosensor seamap.env.duke.edu/ turtles data Ocean tracking network Dalhousie University Aquatic species North America Any location and biosensor oceantrackingnetwork.org/ data (passive acoustic) Seaturtle.org private organization Sea turtles Global Location data (Argos) seaturtle.org Global procellariiform tracking BirdLife international Seabirds Global Location data seabirdtracking.org database Wildlife tracking private organization All species Global Location data (Argos) wildlifetracking.org Wireless remote animal monitor- Swedish University of Agricul- All species Global Any location and biosensor http://www.slu.se/wram/ ing ( WRAM) tural Sciences data ZoaTrack Atlas of living Australia All species Australasia Any location data zoatrack.org Campbell et al. Anim Biotelemetry (2016) 4:1 Page 3 of 4 instantaneous ground speed without any related change (EML) from the Knowledge Network for Biocom- in data output files. Such changes may or may not be dis - plexity; the US Federal Geographic Data Committee’s covered during import to an e-infrastructure and data (FGDC) standards for geographic information (with analysis. The quality of metadata describing data output an extension for biological information); ISO 19115 varies widely—whilst some manufacturers provide thor- from the International Organization for Standardi- ough and up-to-date manuals, data for many devices zation for geographic information; and GPX (GPS lack complete written documentation defining variables, Exchange Format). units, accuracy/precision, etc., and including a history of • As a first step, we also request that individual device changes. manufacturers, if they have not done so already, pro- The resulting ambiguities in how data, and even the vide complete written documentation (metadata) same variables, are reported make it almost impossible for all variables and formats currently used by their for data upload into the repositories to be a fully auto- devices, if needed including a history of past changes mated process and are creating serious challenges for and description of how data differ between devices, those wishing to store and integrate data from multiple user-specific preferences, data access methods, or telemetry devices within a single database. All existing file formats. Such documentation does not allow for e-infrastructures are severely affected by this problem interoperability or automated integration of data into because the creation of dedicated import procedures, repository, but would minimize archiving errors and each tailored to the device, manufacturer, and model, is enable future implementation of the standards above a time-consuming and error-prone task that also requires with historical data. continual monitoring and updating as new models and manufacturers enter the research arena. The current The definition and adoption of such standards by all approach is expensive and will become increasingly manufacturers would dramatically simplify the data infeasible if manufacture proliferation and device diver- acquisition process, augmenting the willingness of bio sification continue at the current rate without globally telemetry researchers to archive their hard-won data- adopted data standards. collections; reduce data management costs, allowing Here, we request that the device manufacturers and e-infrastructures to focus on developing shared analysis scientific community take steps to develop and insti - tools; and minimize the risk of errors derived from data gate standards for the reporting and documentation of handling, enhancing data reusability. These improve data collected by an increasing plethora of animal-borne ments in how the community share and reuse data would telemetry devices. We understand that sensors differ in in turn benefit the device manufactures by placing greater design and purpose; however, we believe that most of the value on the data their devices collect to the wider scien scientifically relevant data collected can be described by tific and natural resource management communities. a finite set of variables. When stored along with informa - The definition and adoption of standards in the report tion about the sensor (manufacturer, model, etc.), shared ing of data collected by animal-borne electronic devices data standards can allow data from a wide range of sen- are the first necessary step towards a more general and sors to be properly archived and analysed together. In comprehensive set of data standards that would enhance particular, we ask that manufacturers and the research interoperability amongst the different e-infrastructures. community design and implement. The recently formed International Bio-Logging Society has made one of its goals to “standardize data protocols • Standard variable names, definitions, data types, and to make the various marine and terrestrial databases units for commonly used data attributes. interoperable”. For reasons outlined in this article, we • A standard and documented file format, such as an urge for this to be instigated at the level of device man Extensible Markup Language (XML) schema, as an ufacture and propose a dedicated workshop at the next option for receiving data. There are already widely International Bio-Logging Science Symposium, inviting accepted standards for reporting many of the vari developers from all the Animal Biotelemetry e-infra - - ables most commonly used by biotelemetry devices structures, as well as the leading device manufacturers (for example, providing timestamps in Coordinated and research scientists. Universal Time (UTC) and geographic coordinates in the WGS84 reference system). Several standards Conclusions already exist to describe ecological and geospatial We have a unique community in which researchers, soft- data that can be used as a preliminary reference, for ware developers, and manufacturers work collaboratively example: Darwin Core and ABCD from TDWG for to develop new tools to address novel reserach questions. biological collections; Ecological Metadata Language We believe we can now work together to develop the Campbell et al. Anim Biotelemetry (2016) 4:1 Page 4 of 4 2. Campbell HA, Beyer HL, Dennis TE, Dwyer RG, Forester JD, Fukuda Y, data standards needed to meet growing data archiving Lynch C, Hindell MA, Menke N, Morales JM, Richardson C, Rodgers E, requirements and enable the multi-species, long-term, Taylor G, Watts ME, Westcott DA. Finding our way: on the sharing and and continental-scale ecological studies that the research reuse of animal telemetry data in Australasia. Sci Total Environ. 2015;. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.01.089. community is striving towards [1, 8]. 3. Coyne MS, Godley BJ. Satellite tracking and analysis tool (STAT ): an inte- grated system for archiving, analyzing and mapping animal tracking data. Authors’ contributions Mar Ecol Prog Ser. 2005;301:1–7. All authors contributed equally in the writing and proofing of this manuscript. 4. Kranstauber B, Cameron A, Weinzierl R, Fountain T, Tilak S, Wikelski M, Kays All authors read and approved the final manuscript. R. The Movebank data model for animal tracking. Environ Model Softw. 2011;26(6):834–5. Author details 5. Cagnacci F, Focardi S, Hewison AJM, Morellet N, Heurich M, Stache A, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin 2 3 Kjellander P, Linnell JDC, Mysterud A, Neteler M, Delucchi L, Ossi F, Urbano University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia. Freelance consultant, Milan, Italy. Max F. Partial migration in roe deer: migratory and resident tactics are end Planck Institute for Ornithology, Am Obstberg 1, 78315 Radolfzell, Germany. points of a behavioural gradient determined by ecological factors. Oikos. Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University 2011;120:1790–802. of Agricultural Sciences, Skogsmarksgränd, 90183 Umeå, Sweden. Depart- 6. Dwyer RG, Campbell HA, Brooking C, Brimblecombe W, Hunter J, Watts ment of Biodiversity and Molecular Ecology, Fondazione Edmund Mach, ME, Franklin CE. An open web-based system for the analysis and sharing Via Edmund Mach 1, 38010 S. Michele All’adige, Trentino, Italy. Organismic and analysis of animal tracking data. Anim Biotelemetry. 2015;3(1):1–11. and Evolutionary Biology Department, Harvard University, 26 Oxford St, Cam- 7. Dettki H, Brode M, Clegg I, Giles T, Hallgren J. Wireless remote animal bridge, MA 02138, USA. monitoring ( WRAM)—a new international database e-infrastructure for management and sharing of telemetry sensor data from fish and wildlife. Competing interests In: Ames DP, Quinn NWT, Rizzoli AE, editors. Proceedings of the 7th The authors declare that they have no competing interests. International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software, June 15–19, San Diego; 2014. p. 122–8. ISBN: 978-88-9035-744-2. Received: 3 September 2015 Accepted: 23 December 2015 8. Hussey NE, Kessel ST, Aarestrup K, Cooke SJ, Cowley PD, Fisk AT, Harcourt RG, Holland KN, Iverson SJ, Kocik JF, Mills Flemming JE, Whosiskey FG. Aquatic animal telemetry: a panoramic window into the underwater world. Science. 2015;348(6240):1255642. doi:10.1126/science.1255642. References 1. Kays R, Crofoot MC, Jetz W, Wikelski M. Terrestrial animal tracking as an eye on life and planet. Science. 2015;348(6240):aaa2478. doi:10.1126/sci- ence.aaa2478. Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central and we will help you at every step: • We accept pre-submission inquiries • Our selector tool helps you to find the most relevant journal • We provide round the clock customer support • Convenient online submission • Thorough peer review • Inclusion in PubMed and all major indexing services • Maximum visibility for your research Submit your manuscript at www.biomedcentral.com/submit

Journal

Animal BiotelemetrySpringer Journals

Published: Jan 6, 2016

References