4.4 Recommendations
We reiterate the following points from previous reviews (Barron et al,
2010; Bodey et al, 2018) that it would be beneficial to: standardise
terminology, report device type and attachment, and provide all
collected data. Many publications are still not following the protocols
suggested in these publications, which are vital for future improvements
to studies and analysis and will ensure that comprehensive comparisons
between studies and species can be undertaken. Reporting the necessary
key information can help ensure that standard protocols are followed and
therefore improved (Andrews et al, 2019).
To improve data management, accessibility, and analysis, we recommend
standardising animal tracking terminology when referring to tracking
technologies. Currently, multiple words and terms are used synonymously
across publications (Cooke et al, 2021). We recommend using the terms
“GPS tags/ transmitters” and “radio tags/ transmitters” opposed to
“units” or “trackers”. Terms such as radio telemetry are also used
as common synonyms, however this refers to the whole radio tracking
system, a radio transmitter, a radio antenna, and a radio receiver. The
terms biologging and data loggers are often used as an umbrella term
(Whitford & Klimley, 2019; Cooke et al, 2021) but should be used in
conjunction with GPS or radio tags/transmitters so that readers are
aware of the technology used. Units would ideally be used to describe
the whole device being attached to an animal which may include
accelerometers and/or environmental recording devices.
Studies present multiple different sampling rates and durations so that
almost all movement studies are unique. These are often driven by
constraints on the number of individual tags that can be deployed, and
ultimately relies on the restrictions of capturing animals to tag and
the funding of different projects. However, with the improvement and
reduces costs of GPS tags it would be highly beneficial for the
community to aim to develop some standard minimum sampling rates and
durations in an attempt to make diverse datasets more compatible
(Campbell et al, 2016; Sequeira et al, 2021). Tag failure must also be
considered in future studies, and it is critical that studies report all
data including tag failures and discrepancies from methods and results.
Finally, to allow reproducibility and future analysis, movement data
should be shared in global data repositories. Making data publicly
available, increases broad and inter-disciplinary collaborations and
ensure that data are used most effectively. Data can also be used for
further analysis by other scientists from different academic backgrounds
and offers the chance of greater interdisciplinarity between subjects
and ensures that data are used to their maximum potential. Repositories
can help safeguard fundamental baseline data, which helps drive broader,
temporal ecological questions that would not be possible with single or
few studies (Tucker et al, 2018; Davidson et al, 2020; Rutz et al,
2020). This is already beginning to happen with data repositories for
animal tracking, such as Movebank.org, and through conversations
regarding registering all tracking device deployments (Rutz, 2022).