The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Distinguishing technology from biology: a critical review of the use of GPS telemetry data in ecology
Open accessAbstract
In the past decade, ecologists have witnessed vast improvements in our ability to collect animal movement data through animal-borne technology, such as through GPS or ARGOS systems. However, more data does not necessarily yield greater knowledge in understanding animal ecology and conservation. In this paper, we provide a review of the major benefits, problems and potential misuses of GPS/Argos technology to animal ecology and conservation. Benefits are obvious, and include the ability to collect fine-scale spatio-temporal location data on many previously impossible to study animals, such as ocean-going fish, migratory songbirds and long-distance migratory mammals. These benefits come with significant problems, however, imposed by frequent collar failures and high cost, which often results in weaker study design, reduced sample sizes and poorer statistical inference. In addition, we see the divorcing of biologists from a field-based understanding of animal ecology to be a growing problem. Despite these difficulties, GPS devices have provided significant benefits, particularly in the conservation and ecology of wide-ranging species. We conclude by offering suggestions for ecologists on which kinds of ecological questions would currently benefit the most from GPS/Argos technology, and where the technology has been potentially misused. Significant conceptual challenges remain, however, including the links between movement and behaviour, and movement and population dynamics.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Wolves influence elk movements: Behavior shapes a trophic cascade in Yellowstone National Park
Fortin, D., Beyer, H. L., Boyce, M. S., Smith, D. W., Duchesne, T., & Mao, J. S. (2005) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/04-0953 · Cited by 1,351 · cited 4×
“With larger datasets, come increased statistical headaches such as the quantification of GPS bias (Frair et al. 2010), appropriate statistical modelling of highly correlated data (Fieberg et al. 2010) and debates over the appropriate movement modelling approaches (Bartumeus et al. 2002; Smouse et…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialElectronic tagging and population structure of Atlantic bluefin tuna
Block, B. A., Teo, S. L. H., Walli, A., Boustany, A., Stokesbury, M. J. W., Farwell, C. J., Weng, K. C., Dewar, H., & Williams, T. D. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03463 · Cited by 781
The Last Mile: How to Sustain Long‐Distance Migration in Mammals
BERGER, J. (2004) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00548.x · Cited by 524
Can parks protect migratory ungulates? The case of the Serengeti wildebeest.
Thirgood, S., Mosser, A., Tham, S., Hopcraft, G., Mwangomo, E., Mlengeya, T., Kilewo, M., Fryxell, J., Sinclair, A. R. E., & Borner, M. (2004) · Animal Conservation · doi:10.1017/s1367943004001404 · Cited by 253
Serengeti wildebeest migratory patterns modeled from rainfall and new vegetation growth
Boone, R. B., Thirgood, S. J., & Hopcraft, J. G. C. (2006) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1987:swmpmf]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 215
Cited by
Burton, A. C., Neilson, E., Moreira, D., Ladle, A., Steenweg, R., Fisher, J. T., Bayne, E., & Boutin, S. (2015) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12432 · Cited by 1,258
Global positioning system and associated technologies in animal behaviour and ecological research
Tomkiewicz, S. M., Fuller, M. R., Kie, J. G., & Bates, K. K. (2010) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0090 · Cited by 528
Frair, J. L., Fieberg, J., Hebblewhite, M., Cagnacci, F., DeCesare, N. J., & Pedrotti, L. (2010) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0084 · Cited by 420
Self-citationOptimizing the use of biologgers for movement ecology research
Williams, H. J., Taylor, L. A., Benhamou, S., Bijleveld, A. I., Clay, T. A., de Grissac, S., Demšar, U., English, H. M., Franconi, N., Gómez‐Laich, A., et al. (2020) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13094 · Cited by 333
Forest elephant movement and habitat use in a tropical forest-grassland mosaic in Gabon
Mills, E. C., Poulsen, J. R., Fay, J. M., Morkel, P., Clark, C. J., Meier, A., Beirne, C., & White, L. J. T. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0199387 · Cited by 85
Metadata
- Authors
- Hebblewhite, M., & Haydon, D. T.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2010-07-27
- Volume
- 365
- Issue
- 1550
- Pages
- 2303-2312
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- OpenAlex
- W2101110877
- Cited by
- 740
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 23.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Distinguishing technology from biology: a critical review of the use of GPS telemetry data in ecology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2010.0087
- The paper
- Hebblewhite, M., & Haydon, D. T. (2010). Distinguishing technology from biology: a critical review of the use of GPS telemetry data in ecology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0087
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.