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).