Fish Tagged For Research Become Lunch For Gray Seals 48
sciencehabit writes: When scientists slap an acoustic tag on a fish, they may be inadvertently helping seals find their next meal. The tags — rods a few centimeters long that give off a ping that can be detected from up to a kilometer away — are often used to follow fish for studies on their migration, hunting, or survival rates. Researchers working with 10 gray seals (Halichoerus grypus) who were captive for a year have now reported that the animals can learn to associate the pings with food. If the findings hold true in the wild, the authors warn, they could skew the results of studies trying to analyze fish survival rates or predation.
Re: (Score:3)
Let me help you a bit further:
Why's it never light on my lawn?
Why did it rain and never say good day to the newborn?
On the big screen they showed us a sun
But not as bright in life as the real one
It's never quite the same as the real one
And tell me, grey seal
How does it feel to be so wise?
To see through eyes that only see what's real
Tell me, grey seal
I never learned why meteors were formed
I only farmed in schools that were so worn and torn
If anyone can cry then so can I
I read books and draw life from the eye
Re: (Score:3)
Just one ping! We don't want to be mobbed by hungry seals.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, if you understand the seal's dialect, you'll clearly hear them say:
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
Seems pretty benign (Score:2)
Humans have been manipulating the evolution of other lifeforms for hundreds of thousands of years or more already. Perhaps mostly inadvertantly, but our effect is nonetheless there. The trick here would be ensure that only the furriest seals benefit from this technology.
Re: (Score:1)
Humans have been manipulating the evolution of other lifeforms for hundreds of thousands of years or more already.
Humans have been doing for hundreds of thousands of years a lot of things that in modern society are frowned upon. Like, for example, eating people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem isn't the impact it has on the ecosystem, it is that the test results can become skewed by the monitored fish becomes easier to catch.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if true fish population counts might be skewed, if the ones being monitored are all being eaten. It would show that fish populations are smaller than they really are. Which could affect local fisheries and conflate environmental impact concerns.
Fair chance (Score:2)
Equip the fish with lasers to even the odds.
Re: (Score:2)
I take it those particular researchers have never studied seals before.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't take a scientist to know that radio doesn't work well underwater either.
Re:So you use Radio instead, eh? (Score:4, Informative)
Radio waves don't travel well underwater. You need stupidly low frequencies like those used for submarine communication, and you won't be able to generate those frequencies from an object that's a few cm long which means you're stuck with acoustic methods. The tags in question operate at 69KHz, which as far as I know is outside the hearing range of seals - this article makes me wonder though, I've got it bookmarked and I'll give the underlying paper a good read when I've got the time.
I'm actually an engineer at the company that makes the tags in question. We're hardly a huge corporation (100 people) and we don't have the financial clout or even any obvious reason to bankroll corrupt science - we just make scientific gear that helps scientists do their science. I wouldn't consider us to be much different from a company that makes lab coats or glassware.
Re: (Score:2)
Going higher than 69KHz reduces the range of the tags, as higher frequencies are attenuated more in water. This means you'll need a more powerful tag (with size/battery life implications) or more deployed receivers to make the system work at a higher frequency.
The tags do produce harmonics at 138KHz/207KHz/onwards, but there's no distortion mechanism present that should allow frequencies lower than 69KHz to be created. There's no modulation done on the 69KHz carrier, the carrier is on/off keyed with time di
Re: (Score:2)
... there's no distortion mechanism present that should allow frequencies lower than 69KHz to be created. There's no modulation done on the 69KHz carrier, the carrier is on/off keyed ...
No signal which carries information can be perfectly distortion-free. Just switching the carrier on and off is a form of modulation (akin to a continuous wave [wikipedia.org] RF transmitter), with a bandwidth dependent on just how quickly the amplitude is switched, which is related in turn to the maximum rate of data transmission. This can easily result in signal components below the carrier frequency.
However, a quick search suggests that harbor seals respond to frequencies as high as 180 kHz in water (with a peak sensitiv
Re: So you use Radio instead, eh? (Score:2)
True. The ping frequency is low though (hundreds of ms between pings) which limits the modulation sidelobes, and even the initial banging on of the carrier at the beginning of each ping is fairly well bandpass filtered by the high Q of the transmitter. You can't hear a tag click/chirp/whatever if you hold it against your ear.
But if seals can detect upwards of 180khz as you're saying... Yeah, that's a problem.
Gray Seals (Score:1)
Maybe that's what happened to Osama.
it figures (Score:3)
-[Seal] Give me a ping, fish, one ping only....
-[TAG] PING
-[Fish] WTF again?!?!
-[Seal] GULP
-[Humans] Damn, we lost another one... oh well, back to youporn.
Easy solution for the scientists (Score:3)
Change the scope of to study to be the migration patterns of seals who are good at finding pinging fish.
Re:Easy solution for the scientists^Polar Bears (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you SURE polar bears are in serious decline?
This sounds suspiciously like something a seal would say.
Re: (Score:2)
Not unless the seals get through the orcas first. (In the Pacific Northwest, there are two types of orca pods - "resident" and "transient". One of them pretty much eats just fish, the other, seals. If you go whale watching at the right time, you can see them catch seals. It's a rather organized affair - if the seal is on a floating object, the orcas bump into said ob
Re: (Score:2)
There is no conclusive evidence that scientific research on animals yields meaningful results for human welfare.
We need more research on animals to test this.
Get rid of those evil seals (Score:1)
First they screw the penguins, and now they eat our fish.
What next?
Re: (Score:2)
What next?
Is your bicycle locked up?
Re: (Score:2)
What, seals can ride bikes now?
Re: (Score:2)
based on what a girl once told me (Score:2)
Maybe it's just polite foreplay?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci... [dailymail.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
Observer effect (Score:2)
so use negative reinforcement (Score:2)
attach the pingers to sharks and orcas too.
Are any of these fish researchers named "Pavlov"? (Score:2)
Maybe he's not a fish research. Maybe he's a seal behaviorist. Or maybe he wants the cute seals to stay well fed.