Literature DB >> 33617554

Accuracy and precision of citizen scientist animal counts from drone imagery.

Sarah A Wood1, Patrick W Robinson1, Daniel P Costa1,2, Roxanne S Beltran1.   

Abstract

Repeated counts of animal abundance can reveal changes in local ecosystem health and inform conservation strategies. Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), also known as drones, are commonly used to photograph animals in remote locations; however, counting animals in images is a laborious task. Crowd-sourcing can reduce the time required to conduct these censuses considerably, but must first be validated against expert counts to measure sources of error. Our objectives were to assess the accuracy and precision of citizen science counts and make recommendations for future citizen science projects. We uploaded drone imagery from Año Nuevo Island (California, USA) to a curated Zooniverse website that instructed citizen scientists to count seals and sea lions. Across 212 days, over 1,500 volunteers counted animals in 90,000 photographs. We quantified the error associated with several descriptive statistics to extract a single citizen science count per photograph from the 15 repeat counts and then compared the resulting citizen science counts to expert counts. Although proportional error was relatively low (9% for sea lions and 5% for seals during the breeding seasons) and improved with repeat sampling, the 12+ volunteers required to reduce error was prohibitively slow, taking on average 6 weeks to estimate animals from a single drone flight covering 25 acres, despite strong public outreach efforts. The single best algorithm was 'Median without the lowest two values', demonstrating that citizen scientists tended to under-estimate the number of animals present. Citizen scientists accurately counted adult seals, but accuracy was lower when sea lions were present during the summer and could be confused for seals. We underscore the importance of validation efforts and careful project design for researchers hoping to combine citizen science with imagery from drones, occupied aircraft, and/or remote cameras.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33617554      PMCID: PMC7899343          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244040

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  14 in total

Review 1.  A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities.

Authors:  Cathy C Conrad; Krista G Hilchey
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  A new dawn for citizen science.

Authors:  Jonathan Silvertown
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2009-07-06       Impact factor: 17.712

3.  Variation in outer blubber lipid concentration does not reflect morphological body condition in humpback whales.

Authors:  Fredrik Christiansen; Kate R Sprogis; Jasmin Gross; Juliana Castrillon; Hunter A Warick; Eva Leunissen; Susan Bengtson Nash
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 4.  A computer vision for animal ecology.

Authors:  Ben G Weinstein
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 5.091

5.  Census error and the detection of density dependence.

Authors:  Robert P Freckleton; Andrew R Watkinson; Rhys E Green; William J Sutherland
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.091

6.  Behavioral indicators for conserving mammal diversity.

Authors:  Douglas W Morris; Burt P Kotler; Joel S Brown; Vijayan Sundararaj; Som B Ale
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 5.691

Review 7.  Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science?

Authors:  Rick Bonney; Tina B Phillips; Heidi L Ballard; Jody W Enck
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2015-10-07

8.  Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Artificial Intelligence Revolutionizing Wildlife Monitoring and Conservation.

Authors:  Luis F Gonzalez; Glen A Montes; Eduard Puig; Sandra Johnson; Kerrie Mengersen; Kevin J Gaston
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 3.576

9.  Automatically identifying, counting, and describing wild animals in camera-trap images with deep learning.

Authors:  Mohammad Sadegh Norouzzadeh; Anh Nguyen; Margaret Kosmala; Alexandra Swanson; Meredith S Palmer; Craig Packer; Jeff Clune
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Scientists@Home: what drives the quantity and quality of online citizen science participation?

Authors:  Oded Nov; Ofer Arazy; David Anderson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.