Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNilsson, C
dc.contributor.authorDokter, AM
dc.contributor.authorSchmid, B
dc.contributor.authorScacco, M
dc.contributor.authorVerlinden, L
dc.contributor.authorBäckman, J
dc.contributor.authorHaase, G
dc.contributor.authorDell'Omo, G
dc.contributor.authorChapman, JW
dc.contributor.authorLeijnse, H
dc.contributor.authorLiechti, F
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-12T15:40:03Z
dc.date.issued2018-05-16
dc.description.abstractAdvances in information technology are increasing the use of radar as a tool to investigate and monitor bird migration movements. We set up a field campaign to compare and validate outputs from different radar systems. Here we compare the pattern of nocturnal bird migration movements recorded by four different radar systems at a site in southern Sweden. Within the range of the weather radar (WR) Ängelholm, we operated a "BirdScan" (BS) dedicated bird radar, a standard marine radar (MR), and a tracking radar (TR). The measures of nightly migration intensities, provided by three of the radars (WR, BS, MR), corresponded well with respect to the relative seasonal course of migration, while absolute migration intensity agreed reasonably only between WR and BS. Flight directions derived from WR, BS and TR corresponded very well, despite very different sample sizes. Estimated mean ground speeds differed among all four systems. The correspondence among systems was highest under clear sky conditions and at high altitudes. Synthesis and applications. While different radar systems can provide useful information on nocturnal bird migration, they have distinct strengths and weaknesses, and all require supporting data to allow for species level inference. Weather radars continuously detect avian biomass flows across a wide altitude band, making them a useful tool for monitoring and predictive applications at regional to continental scales that do not rely on resolving individuals. BirdScan and marine radar's strengths are in local and low altitude applications, such as collision risks with man-made structures and airport safety, although marine radars should not be trusted for absolute intensities of movement. In quantifying flight behaviour of individuals, TR is the most informative.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipWe acknowledge the support provided by COST – European Cooperation in Science and Technology through the Action ES1305 ‘European Network for the Radar Surveillance of Animal Movement’ (ENRAM) in facilitating this collaboration. The study received financial support from Gyllenstierna Krapperup ́s Foundation and the Centre for Animal Movement Research (CAnMove) financed by a Linnaeus grant (349-2007-8690) from the Swedish Research Council and Lund University.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 16 May 2018.en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1365-2664.13174
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/33177
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWileyen_GB
dc.relation.sourceData available via the Dryad Digital Repository https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.nr1h6t0 (Nilsson et al., 2018).en_GB
dc.rights.embargoreasonUnder embargo until 16 May 2019 in compliance with publisher policy.en_GB
dc.rights© 2018 British Ecological Society.en_GB
dc.subjectBird migrationen_GB
dc.subjectRadar monitoringen_GB
dc.subjectGround speeden_GB
dc.subjectMigration traffic rateen_GB
dc.subjectNocturnal migrationen_GB
dc.subjectFlight Behavioren_GB
dc.subjectWeather radaren_GB
dc.subjectEnvironmental assessment studiesen_GB
dc.titleField validation of radar systems for monitoring bird migrationen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.identifier.issn0021-8901
dc.descriptionThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Applied Ecologyen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record