Cited by 75Avian ecology and behaviorMarine animal studies overviewWildlife Ecology and Conservation

A comparison of techniques for classifying behavior from accelerometers for two species of seabird

Open access
Patterson, Allison, Gilchrist, Hugh Grant, Chivers, Lorraine, Hatch, Scott, Elliott, Kyle·2019·Ecology and Evolution

Abstract

The behavior of many wild animals remains a mystery, as it is difficult to quantify behavior of species that cannot be easily followed throughout their daily or seasonal movements. Accelerometers can solve some of these mysteries, as they collect activity data at a high temporal resolution (<1 s), can be relatively small (<1 g) so they minimally disrupt behavior, and are increasingly capable of recording data for long periods. Nonetheless, there is a need for increased validation of methods to classify animal behavior from accelerometers to promote widespread adoption of this technology in ecology. We assessed the accuracy of six different behavioral assignment methods for two species of seabird, thick‐billed murres (Uria lomvia) and black‐legged kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla). We identified three behaviors using tri‐axial accelerometers: standing, swimming, and flying, after classifying diving using a pressure sensor for murres. We evaluated six classification methods relative to independent classifications from concurrent GPS tracking data. We used four variables for classification: depth, wing beat frequency, pitch, and dynamic acceleration. Average accuracy for all methods was >98% for murres, and 89% and 93% for kittiwakes during incubation and chick rearing, respectively. Variable selection showed that classification accuracy did not improve with more than two (kittiwakes) or three (murres) variables. We conclude that simple methods of behavioral classification can be as accurate for classifying basic behaviors as more complex approaches, and that identifying suitable accelerometer metrics is more important than using a particular classification method when the objective is to develop a daily activity or energy budget. Highly accurate daily activity budgets can be generated from accelerometer data using multiple methods and a small number of accelerometer metrics; therefore, identifying a suitable behavioral classification method should not be a barrier to using accelerometers in studies of seabird behavior and ecology.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ece3.4740

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Hidden Markov models allow identification of relevant changes in behavioral intensity (activity versus rest) while taking into account the serial dependence between observations.

    “We used hidden Markov models (HMMs) to infer behavioral states from the 10-Hz acceleration data as they allow identification of relevant changes in behavioral intensity, i.e., activity versus rest, taking into account the serial dependence between observations [42,70].”

    From Seasonal activity levels of a farm-island population of striated caracaras (Phalcoboenus australis) in the Falkland Islands (2020) · cites this paper as [70]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says HMMs account for serial dependence in acceleration data and model transitions between behavioral states. The Methods section (page unavailable) describes classifying seabird behaviors such as flying and swimming, but does not establish the specific activity-versus-rest distinction attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 56 · Cited by 75

Authors
Patterson, A., Gilchrist, H. G., Chivers, L., Hatch, S., & Elliott, K.
Affiliations
  • McGill University (CA)
  • Environment and Climate Change Canada (CA)
  • Institute for Seabird Research and Conservation Anchorage Alaska
Corresponding author
Patterson, Allison
Venue
Ecology and Evolution
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-02-21
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
3030-3045
ISSN
2045-7758 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2917105194
Cited by
75
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
5.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ecology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • British Ornithologists’ Union
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • McGill University (2015-7599, F11-020)
  • University of Manitoba
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Marine animal studies overview
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
seabird behavior, murres, kittiwake, diving behavior, activity budget, wingbeat frequency, dynamic acceleration, energy balance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review