Comparing Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) and Vessel-based Tracking Performance for Locating Acoustically Tagged Fish

Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV's) are increasingly used to collect physical, chemical, and biological information in the marine environment. Recent efforts include merging AUV technology with acoustic telemetry to provide information on the distribution and movements of marine fish. We com...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Marine fisheries review 2013-09, Vol.75 (4), p.27-42
Hauptverfasser: Eiler, John H, Grothues, Thomas M, Dobarro, Joseph A, Masuda, Michele M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 42
container_issue 4
container_start_page 27
container_title Marine fisheries review
container_volume 75
creator Eiler, John H
Grothues, Thomas M
Dobarro, Joseph A
Masuda, Michele M
description Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV's) are increasingly used to collect physical, chemical, and biological information in the marine environment. Recent efforts include merging AUV technology with acoustic telemetry to provide information on the distribution and movements of marine fish. We compared surface vessel and AUV tracking capabilities under rigorous conditions in coastal waters near Juneau, Alaska. Tracking surveys were conducted with a REMUS 100 AUV equipped with an integrated acoustic receiver and hydrophone. The AUV was programmed to navigate along predetermined routes to detect both reference transmitters at 20-500 m depths and tagged fish and crabs in situ. Comparable boat surveys were also conducted. Transmitter depth had a major impact on tracking performance. The AUV was equally effective or better than the boat at detecting reference transmitters in shallow water, and significantly better for transmitters at deeper depths. Similar results were observed for tagged animals. Red king crab, Paralithodes camtschaticus, at moderate depths were recorded by both tracking methods, while only the AUV detected Sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria, at depths exceeding 500 m. Strong currents and deep depths caused problems with AUV navigation, position estimation, and operational performance, but reflect problems encountered by other AUV applications that will likely diminish with future advances, enhanced methods, and increased use.
doi_str_mv 10.7755/MFR.75.4.2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1540231440</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A364199658</galeid><sourcerecordid>A364199658</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4252-cb82cee564713347c9b2a84488ab8cdac5ff03024d81b45aa2c1338b7d6ba5543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0sGO0zAQBuAIgURZuPAEkbjsIhJsx26SY1VRWKlo0dL2ak2cSWpI7GI7gr49LuVApR6QD7ZG3z-y5UmS15TkZSnE-8-rx7wUOc_Zk2RG66LOGOH8aTIjpCYZrQryPHnh_TdCCGclnSXHpR0P4LTp08UUrLGjnXy6NS26nxDQpTvcazVgervY7u5SMG2seI9D1oDHNt04UN9P6S_oOutGMArTeEjXVkH401bFjkErGIZjuoG-j6mV9vuXybMOBo-v_u43yXb1YbP8lK0fPt4vF-tMcSZYppqKKUQx5yUtCl6qumFQcV5V0FSqBSW6jhSE8baiDRcATEVXNWU7b0AIXtwkt-e-B2d_TOiDHLVXOAxgMN5MUsEJKyjnJNI3Z9rDgFKbzob4vBOXi2LOaV3PRRVVdkX1aNDBYA12OpYvfH7Fx9XiqNXVwN1FIJqAv0IPk_fy_uvj_9uH3aV9949tJq9N_EptvO73wZ8jF_ztmStnvXfYyYPTI7ijpESepk3GaZOlkFyy4jcWf8Qr</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1540231440</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) and Vessel-based Tracking Performance for Locating Acoustically Tagged Fish</title><source>US Government Documents</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Eiler, John H ; Grothues, Thomas M ; Dobarro, Joseph A ; Masuda, Michele M</creator><creatorcontrib>Eiler, John H ; Grothues, Thomas M ; Dobarro, Joseph A ; Masuda, Michele M</creatorcontrib><description>Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV's) are increasingly used to collect physical, chemical, and biological information in the marine environment. Recent efforts include merging AUV technology with acoustic telemetry to provide information on the distribution and movements of marine fish. We compared surface vessel and AUV tracking capabilities under rigorous conditions in coastal waters near Juneau, Alaska. Tracking surveys were conducted with a REMUS 100 AUV equipped with an integrated acoustic receiver and hydrophone. The AUV was programmed to navigate along predetermined routes to detect both reference transmitters at 20-500 m depths and tagged fish and crabs in situ. Comparable boat surveys were also conducted. Transmitter depth had a major impact on tracking performance. The AUV was equally effective or better than the boat at detecting reference transmitters in shallow water, and significantly better for transmitters at deeper depths. Similar results were observed for tagged animals. Red king crab, Paralithodes camtschaticus, at moderate depths were recorded by both tracking methods, while only the AUV detected Sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria, at depths exceeding 500 m. Strong currents and deep depths caused problems with AUV navigation, position estimation, and operational performance, but reflect problems encountered by other AUV applications that will likely diminish with future advances, enhanced methods, and increased use.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-1830</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-2044</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7755/MFR.75.4.2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Superintendent of Documents</publisher><subject>Anoplopoma fimbria ; Decapoda ; Environmental aspects ; Marine ; Marine sciences ; Paralithodes ; Remote submersibles ; Species ; Technology application ; Telemetry</subject><ispartof>Marine fisheries review, 2013-09, Vol.75 (4), p.27-42</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2013 Superintendent of Documents</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4252-cb82cee564713347c9b2a84488ab8cdac5ff03024d81b45aa2c1338b7d6ba5543</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27915,27916</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Eiler, John H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grothues, Thomas M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobarro, Joseph A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Masuda, Michele M</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) and Vessel-based Tracking Performance for Locating Acoustically Tagged Fish</title><title>Marine fisheries review</title><description>Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV's) are increasingly used to collect physical, chemical, and biological information in the marine environment. Recent efforts include merging AUV technology with acoustic telemetry to provide information on the distribution and movements of marine fish. We compared surface vessel and AUV tracking capabilities under rigorous conditions in coastal waters near Juneau, Alaska. Tracking surveys were conducted with a REMUS 100 AUV equipped with an integrated acoustic receiver and hydrophone. The AUV was programmed to navigate along predetermined routes to detect both reference transmitters at 20-500 m depths and tagged fish and crabs in situ. Comparable boat surveys were also conducted. Transmitter depth had a major impact on tracking performance. The AUV was equally effective or better than the boat at detecting reference transmitters in shallow water, and significantly better for transmitters at deeper depths. Similar results were observed for tagged animals. Red king crab, Paralithodes camtschaticus, at moderate depths were recorded by both tracking methods, while only the AUV detected Sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria, at depths exceeding 500 m. Strong currents and deep depths caused problems with AUV navigation, position estimation, and operational performance, but reflect problems encountered by other AUV applications that will likely diminish with future advances, enhanced methods, and increased use.</description><subject>Anoplopoma fimbria</subject><subject>Decapoda</subject><subject>Environmental aspects</subject><subject>Marine</subject><subject>Marine sciences</subject><subject>Paralithodes</subject><subject>Remote submersibles</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Technology application</subject><subject>Telemetry</subject><issn>0090-1830</issn><issn>1939-2044</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>N95</sourceid><recordid>eNqN0sGO0zAQBuAIgURZuPAEkbjsIhJsx26SY1VRWKlo0dL2ak2cSWpI7GI7gr49LuVApR6QD7ZG3z-y5UmS15TkZSnE-8-rx7wUOc_Zk2RG66LOGOH8aTIjpCYZrQryPHnh_TdCCGclnSXHpR0P4LTp08UUrLGjnXy6NS26nxDQpTvcazVgervY7u5SMG2seI9D1oDHNt04UN9P6S_oOutGMArTeEjXVkH401bFjkErGIZjuoG-j6mV9vuXybMOBo-v_u43yXb1YbP8lK0fPt4vF-tMcSZYppqKKUQx5yUtCl6qumFQcV5V0FSqBSW6jhSE8baiDRcATEVXNWU7b0AIXtwkt-e-B2d_TOiDHLVXOAxgMN5MUsEJKyjnJNI3Z9rDgFKbzob4vBOXi2LOaV3PRRVVdkX1aNDBYA12OpYvfH7Fx9XiqNXVwN1FIJqAv0IPk_fy_uvj_9uH3aV9949tJq9N_EptvO73wZ8jF_ztmStnvXfYyYPTI7ijpESepk3GaZOlkFyy4jcWf8Qr</recordid><startdate>20130922</startdate><enddate>20130922</enddate><creator>Eiler, John H</creator><creator>Grothues, Thomas M</creator><creator>Dobarro, Joseph A</creator><creator>Masuda, Michele M</creator><general>Superintendent of Documents</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>L.G</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130922</creationdate><title>Comparing Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) and Vessel-based Tracking Performance for Locating Acoustically Tagged Fish</title><author>Eiler, John H ; Grothues, Thomas M ; Dobarro, Joseph A ; Masuda, Michele M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4252-cb82cee564713347c9b2a84488ab8cdac5ff03024d81b45aa2c1338b7d6ba5543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Anoplopoma fimbria</topic><topic>Decapoda</topic><topic>Environmental aspects</topic><topic>Marine</topic><topic>Marine sciences</topic><topic>Paralithodes</topic><topic>Remote submersibles</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Technology application</topic><topic>Telemetry</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Eiler, John H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grothues, Thomas M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobarro, Joseph A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Masuda, Michele M</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences &amp; Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Marine fisheries review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Eiler, John H</au><au>Grothues, Thomas M</au><au>Dobarro, Joseph A</au><au>Masuda, Michele M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) and Vessel-based Tracking Performance for Locating Acoustically Tagged Fish</atitle><jtitle>Marine fisheries review</jtitle><date>2013-09-22</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>75</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>27</spage><epage>42</epage><pages>27-42</pages><issn>0090-1830</issn><eissn>1939-2044</eissn><abstract>Autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV's) are increasingly used to collect physical, chemical, and biological information in the marine environment. Recent efforts include merging AUV technology with acoustic telemetry to provide information on the distribution and movements of marine fish. We compared surface vessel and AUV tracking capabilities under rigorous conditions in coastal waters near Juneau, Alaska. Tracking surveys were conducted with a REMUS 100 AUV equipped with an integrated acoustic receiver and hydrophone. The AUV was programmed to navigate along predetermined routes to detect both reference transmitters at 20-500 m depths and tagged fish and crabs in situ. Comparable boat surveys were also conducted. Transmitter depth had a major impact on tracking performance. The AUV was equally effective or better than the boat at detecting reference transmitters in shallow water, and significantly better for transmitters at deeper depths. Similar results were observed for tagged animals. Red king crab, Paralithodes camtschaticus, at moderate depths were recorded by both tracking methods, while only the AUV detected Sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria, at depths exceeding 500 m. Strong currents and deep depths caused problems with AUV navigation, position estimation, and operational performance, but reflect problems encountered by other AUV applications that will likely diminish with future advances, enhanced methods, and increased use.</abstract><pub>Superintendent of Documents</pub><doi>10.7755/MFR.75.4.2</doi><tpages>16</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0090-1830
ispartof Marine fisheries review, 2013-09, Vol.75 (4), p.27-42
issn 0090-1830
1939-2044
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1540231440
source US Government Documents; Business Source Complete; EZB Electronic Journals Library
subjects Anoplopoma fimbria
Decapoda
Environmental aspects
Marine
Marine sciences
Paralithodes
Remote submersibles
Species
Technology application
Telemetry
title Comparing Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) and Vessel-based Tracking Performance for Locating Acoustically Tagged Fish
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T18%3A05%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20Autonomous%20Underwater%20Vehicle%20(AUV)%20and%20Vessel-based%20Tracking%20Performance%20for%20Locating%20Acoustically%20Tagged%20Fish&rft.jtitle=Marine%20fisheries%20review&rft.au=Eiler,%20John%20H&rft.date=2013-09-22&rft.volume=75&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=27&rft.epage=42&rft.pages=27-42&rft.issn=0090-1830&rft.eissn=1939-2044&rft_id=info:doi/10.7755/MFR.75.4.2&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA364199658%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1540231440&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A364199658&rfr_iscdi=true