Marine megafauna are difficult to observe and count because many species travel widely and spend large amounts of time submerged. As such, management programmes seeking to conserve these species are often hampered by limited information about population levels. Unoccupied aircraft systems (UAS, aka drones) provide a potentially useful technique for assessing marine animal populations, but a central challenge lies in analysing the vast amounts of data generated in the images or video acquired during each flight. Neural networks are emerging as a powerful tool for automating object detection across data domains and can be applied to UAS imagery to generate new population‐level insights. To explore the utility of these emerging technologies in a challenging field setting, we used neural networks to enumerate olive ridley turtles Results revealed substantial promise for this approach; specifically, our model detected 8% more turtles than manual counts while effectively reducing the manual validation burden from 2,971,554 to 44,822 image windows. Our detection pipeline was trained on a relatively small set of turtle examples ( Our findings highlight the feasibility of combining UAS and neural networks to estimate population levels of diverse marine animals and suggest that the automation inherent in these techniques will soon permit monitoring over spatial and temporal scales that would previously have been impractical.
The flourishing application of drones within marine science provides more opportunity to conduct photogrammetric studies on large and varied populations of many different species. While these new platforms are increasing the size and availability of imagery datasets, established photogrammetry methods require considerable manual input, allowing individual bias in techniques to influence measurements, increasing error and magnifying the time required to apply these techniques. Here, we introduce the next generation of photogrammetry methods utilizing a convolutional neural network to demonstrate the potential of a deep learning‐based photogrammetry system for automatic species identification and measurement. We then present the same data analysed using conventional techniques to validate our automatic methods. Our results compare favorably across both techniques, correctly predicting whale species with 98% accuracy (57/58) for humpback whales, minke whales, and blue whales. Ninety percent of automated length measurements were within 5% of manual measurements, providing sufficient resolution to inform morphometric studies and establish size classes of whales automatically. The results of this study indicate that deep learning techniques applied to survey programs that collect large archives of imagery may help researchers and managers move quickly past analytical bottlenecks and provide more time for abundance estimation, distributional research, and ecological assessments.
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10447902
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Methods in Ecology and Evolution
- Volume:
- 10
- Issue:
- 9
- ISSN:
- 2041-210X
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 1490-1500
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract Lepidochelys olivacea in drone images acquired during a mass‐nesting event on the coast of Ostional, Costa Rica.N = 944), implying that this method can be easily bootstrapped for other applications, and is practical with real‐world UAS datasets. -
more » « less
Abstract As camera trapping has become a standard practice in wildlife ecology, developing techniques to extract additional information from images will increase the utility of generated data. Despite rapid advancements in camera trapping practices, methods for estimating animal size or distance from the camera using captured images have not been standardized. Deriving animal sizes directly from images creates opportunities to collect wildlife metrics such as growth rates or changes in body condition. Distances to animals may be used to quantify important aspects of sampling design such as the effective area sampled or distribution of animals in the camera's field‐of‐view.
We present a method of using pixel measurements in an image to estimate animal size or distance from the camera using a conceptual model in photogrammetry known as the ‘pinhole camera model’. We evaluated the performance of this approach both using stationary three‐dimensional animal targets and in a field setting using live captive reindeer
Rangifer tarandus ranging in size and distance from the camera.We found total mean relative error of estimated animal sizes or distances from the cameras in our simulation was −3.0% and 3.3% and in our field setting was −8.6% and 10.5%, respectively. In our simulation, mean relative error of size or distance estimates were not statistically different between image settings within camera models, between camera models or between the measured dimension used in calculations.
We provide recommendations for applying the pinhole camera model in a wildlife camera trapping context. Our approach of using the pinhole camera model to estimate animal size or distance from the camera produced robust estimates using a single image while remaining easy to implement and generalizable to different camera trap models and installations, thus enhancing its utility for a variety of camera trap applications and expanding opportunities to use camera trap images in novel ways.
-
Abstract Purpose The ability to identify the scholarship of individual authors is essential for performance evaluation. A number of factors hinder this endeavor. Common and similarly spelled surnames make it difficult to isolate the scholarship of individual authors indexed on large databases. Variations in name spelling of individual scholars further complicates matters. Common family names in scientific powerhouses like China make it problematic to distinguish between authors possessing ubiquitous and/or anglicized surnames (as well as the same or similar first names). The assignment of unique author identifiers provides a major step toward resolving these difficulties. We maintain, however, that in and of themselves, author identifiers are not sufficient to fully address the author uncertainty problem. In this study we build on the author identifier approach by considering commonalities in fielded data between authors containing the same surname and first initial of their first name. We illustrate our approach using three case studies. Design/methodology/approach The approach we advance in this study is based on commonalities among fielded data in search results. We cast a broad initial net—i.e., a Web of Science (WOS) search for a given author’s last name, followed by a comma, followed by the first initial of his or her first name (e.g., a search for ‘John Doe’ would assume the form: ‘Doe, J’). Results for this search typically contain all of the scholarship legitimately belonging to this author in the given database (i.e., all of his or her true positives), along with a large amount of noise, or scholarship not belonging to this author (i.e., a large number of false positives). From this corpus we proceed to iteratively weed out false positives and retain true positives. Author identifiers provide a good starting point—e.g., if ‘Doe, J’ and ‘Doe, John’ share the same author identifier, this would be sufficient for us to conclude these are one and the same individual. We find email addresses similarly adequate—e.g., if two author names which share the same surname and same first initial have an email address in common, we conclude these authors are the same person. Author identifier and email address data is not always available, however. When this occurs, other fields are used to address the author uncertainty problem. Commonalities among author data other than unique identifiers and email addresses is less conclusive for name consolidation purposes. For example, if ‘Doe, John’ and ‘Doe, J’ have an affiliation in common, do we conclude that these names belong the same person? They may or may not; affiliations have employed two or more faculty members sharing the same last and first initial. Similarly, it’s conceivable that two individuals with the same last name and first initial publish in the same journal, publish with the same co-authors, and/or cite the same references. Should we then ignore commonalities among these fields and conclude they’re too imprecise for name consolidation purposes? It is our position that such commonalities are indeed valuable for addressing the author uncertainty problem, but more so when used in combination. Our approach makes use of automation as well as manual inspection, relying initially on author identifiers, then commonalities among fielded data other than author identifiers, and finally manual verification. To achieve name consolidation independent of author identifier matches, we have developed a procedure that is used with bibliometric software called VantagePoint (see www.thevantagepoint.com) While the application of our technique does not exclusively depend on VantagePoint, it is the software we find most efficient in this study. The script we developed to implement this procedure is designed to implement our name disambiguation procedure in a way that significantly reduces manual effort on the user’s part. Those who seek to replicate our procedure independent of VantagePoint can do so by manually following the method we outline, but we note that the manual application of our procedure takes a significant amount of time and effort, especially when working with larger datasets. Our script begins by prompting the user for a surname and a first initial (for any author of interest). It then prompts the user to select a WOS field on which to consolidate author names. After this the user is prompted to point to the name of the authors field, and finally asked to identify a specific author name (referred to by the script as the primary author) within this field whom the user knows to be a true positive (a suggested approach is to point to an author name associated with one of the records that has the author’s ORCID iD or email address attached to it). The script proceeds to identify and combine all author names sharing the primary author’s surname and first initial of his or her first name who share commonalities in the WOS field on which the user was prompted to consolidate author names. This typically results in significant reduction in the initial dataset size. After the procedure completes the user is usually left with a much smaller (and more manageable) dataset to manually inspect (and/or apply additional name disambiguation techniques to). Research limitations Match field coverage can be an issue. When field coverage is paltry dataset reduction is not as significant, which results in more manual inspection on the user’s part. Our procedure doesn’t lend itself to scholars who have had a legal family name change (after marriage, for example). Moreover, the technique we advance is (sometimes, but not always) likely to have a difficult time dealing with scholars who have changed careers or fields dramatically, as well as scholars whose work is highly interdisciplinary. Practical implications The procedure we advance has the ability to save a significant amount of time and effort for individuals engaged in name disambiguation research, especially when the name under consideration is a more common family name. It is more effective when match field coverage is high and a number of match fields exist. Originality/value Once again, the procedure we advance has the ability to save a significant amount of time and effort for individuals engaged in name disambiguation research. It combines preexisting with more recent approaches, harnessing the benefits of both. Findings Our study applies the name disambiguation procedure we advance to three case studies. Ideal match fields are not the same for each of our case studies. We find that match field effectiveness is in large part a function of field coverage. Comparing original dataset size, the timeframe analyzed for each case study is not the same, nor are the subject areas in which they publish. Our procedure is more effective when applied to our third case study, both in terms of list reduction and 100% retention of true positives. We attribute this to excellent match field coverage, and especially in more specific match fields, as well as having a more modest/manageable number of publications. While machine learning is considered authoritative by many, we do not see it as practical or replicable. The procedure advanced herein is both practical, replicable and relatively user friendly. It might be categorized into a space between ORCID and machine learning. Machine learning approaches typically look for commonalities among citation data, which is not always available, structured or easy to work with. The procedure we advance is intended to be applied across numerous fields in a dataset of interest (e.g. emails, coauthors, affiliations, etc.), resulting in multiple rounds of reduction. Results indicate that effective match fields include author identifiers, emails, source titles, co-authors and ISSNs. While the script we present is not likely to result in a dataset consisting solely of true positives (at least for more common surnames), it does significantly reduce manual effort on the user’s part. Dataset reduction (after our procedure is applied) is in large part a function of (a) field availability and (b) field coverage.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Landmark‐based geometric morphometrics has emerged as an essential discipline for the quantitative analysis of size and shape in ecology and evolution. With the ever‐increasing density of digitized landmarks, the possible development of a fully automated method of landmark placement has attracted considerable attention. Despite the recent progress in image registration techniques, which could provide a pathway to automation, three‐dimensional (3D) morphometric data are still mainly gathered by trained experts. For the most part, the large infrastructure requirements necessary to perform image‐based registration, together with its system specificity and its overall speed, have prevented its wide dissemination.
Here, we propose and implement a general and lightweight point cloud‐based approach to automatically collect high‐dimensional landmark data in 3D surfaces (Automated Landmarking through Point cloud Alignment and Correspondence Analysis). Our framework possesses several advantages compared with image‐based approaches. First, it presents comparable landmarking accuracy, despite relying on a single, random reference specimen and much sparser sampling of the structure's surface. Second, it can be efficiently run on consumer‐grade personal computers. Finally, it is general and can be applied at the intraspecific level to any biological structure of interest, regardless of whether anatomical atlases are available.
Our validation procedures indicate that the method can recover intraspecific patterns of morphological variation that are largely comparable to those obtained by manual digitization, indicating that the use of an automated landmarking approach should not result in different conclusions regarding the nature of multivariate patterns of morphological variation.
The proposed point cloud‐based approach has the potential to increase the scale and reproducibility of morphometrics research. To allow ALPACA to be used out‐of‐the‐box by users with no prior programming experience, we implemented it as a SlicerMorph module. SlicerMorph is an extension that enables geometric morphometrics data collection and 3D specimen analysis within the open‐source 3D Slicer biomedical visualization ecosystem. We expect that convenient access to this platform will make ALPACA broadly applicable within ecology and evolution.
-
Parallel-laser photogrammetry is growing in popularity as a way to collect non-invasive body size data from wild mammals. Despite its many appeals, this method requires researchers to hand-measure (i) the pixel distance between the parallel laser spots (inter-laser distance) to produce a scale within the image, and (ii) the pixel distance between the study subject’s body landmarks (inter-landmark distance). This manual effort is time-consuming and introduces human error: a researcher measuring the same image twice will rarely return the same values both times (resulting in within-observer error), as is also the case when two researchers measure the same image (resulting in between-observer error). Here, we present two independent methods that automate the inter-laser distance measurement of parallel-laser photogrammetry images. One method uses machine learning and image processing techniques in Python, and the other uses image processing techniques in ImageJ. Both of these methods reduce labor and increase precision without sacrificing accuracy. We first introduce the workflow of the two methods. Then, using two parallel-laser datasets of wild mountain gorilla and wild savannah baboon images, we validate the precision of these two automated methods relative to manual measurements and to each other. We also estimate the reduction of variation in final body size estimates in centimeters when adopting these automated methods, as these methods have no human error. Finally, we highlight the strengths of each method, suggest best practices for adopting either of them, and propose future directions for the automation of parallel-laser photogrammetry data.more » « less
