Testing and deployment of C-VISS (cetacean-borne video camera and integrated sensor system) on wild dolphins

Abstract

Multi-sensor biologgers are a powerful method for studying individual behaviors of free-ranging species, yet the challenges of attaching non-invasive biologgers to agile, fast-moving marine species have prohibited application of this technique to small (<5 m) cetaceans. Integration of video cameras into such biologgers is critical to understanding behavior from the animal’s perspective; however, this technique has not been applied to small cetaceans. We examined the feasibility of remotely deploying a cetacean-borne video camera and integrated sensor system (“C-VISS”) on small cetaceans. We deployed C-VISS on eight free-swimming dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscurus) off New Zealand (42°25′15″S 173°40′23″E) from December 2015 to January 2016, collecting a total of 535 min of video footage (average = 66.8 ± 91.10 SD, range 9–284). Dolphins were observed to show limited reactions to biologger attachment attempts and deployments. Social and environmental parameters derived from video footage include conspecific body condition, mother-calf spatial positioning, affiliative behavior, sexual behavior, sociability, prey, and habitat type. The ability to record behavioral states and fine-scale events from the individual’s perspective will yield new insights into the behavior, socioecology, conservation, rehabilitation, and welfare of small cetaceans.

Full text

Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
DOI 10.1007/s00227-017-3079-z
METHOD
Testing anddeployment ofC-VISS (cetacean-borne video camera
andintegrated sensor system) onwild dolphins
HeidiC.Pearson1,2· PeterW.Jones3· MridulaSrinivasan4· DavidLundquist5·
ChristopherJ.Pearson2· KarenA.Stockin6· GabrielE.Machovsky-Capuska7
Received: 19 July 2016 / Accepted: 18 January 2017
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017
(“C-VISS”) on small cetaceans. We deployed C-VISS on
eight free-swimming dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus
obscurus) off New Zealand (42°25′15″S 173°40′23″E)
from December 2015 to January 2016, collecting a total of
535min of video footage (average = 66.8 ± 91.10 SD, range
9–284). Dolphins were observed to show limited reactions
to biologger attachment attempts and deployments. Social
and environmental parameters derived from video footage
include conspecific body condition, mother-calf spatial
positioning, affiliative behavior, sexual behavior, sociabil-
ity, prey, and habitat type. The ability to record behavioral
states and fine-scale events from the individual’s perspec-
tive will yield new insights into the behavior, socioecology,
conservation, rehabilitation, and welfare of small cetaceans.
Introduction
In spite of recent advances in biologger technology,
fine-scale aspects of behavior, physiology, and ecology
“from the animal’s perspective” remain mostly unknown
for many species (Moll etal. 2007; Hays etal. 2016).
For apex marine predators, such as cetaceans, such data
are critical for creating conservation and management
strategies and understanding the adaptive significance
of social behavior (Dudzinski 1998), individuals’ roles
in structuring ecological communities, vertical oceano-
graphic profiles, and impacts from anthropogenic pres-
sures. Direct observations independent of visual confir-
mation may be conducted via deployment of biologgers
combining multiple sensors (Machovsky-Capuska et al.
2016a). However, studies involving direct observations
of free-ranging individual behavior in highly gregari-
ous species, such as small (<5 m) cetaceans, are rare.
To advance our knowledge of these species, several
Abstract Multi-sensor biologgers are a powerful method
for studying individual behaviors of free-ranging species,
yet the challenges of attaching non-invasive biologgers to
agile, fast-moving marine species have prohibited applica-
tion of this technique to small (<5m) cetaceans. Integra-
tion of video cameras into such biologgers is critical to
understanding behavior from the animal’s perspective;
however, this technique has not been applied to small ceta-
ceans. We examined the feasibility of remotely deploying a
cetacean-borne video camera and integrated sensor system
Responsible Editor: Y. Cherel.
Reviewed by E. Ferrari and undisclosed experts.
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this
article (doi:10.1007/s00227-017-3079-z) contains supplementary
material, which is available to authorized users.
* Heidi C. Pearson
hcpearson@alaska.edu
1 University ofAlaska Southeast, 11120 Glacier Hwy, Juneau,
AK99801, USA
2 Dusky Dolphin Research Project, 17131 Glacier Hwy,
Juneau, AK99801, USA
3 School ofElectrical andInformation Engineering, The
University ofSydney, Sydney, Australia
4 National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway,
SilverSpring, MD20910, USA
5 Department ofConservation, 18-32 Manners St,
Wellington6143, NewZealand
6 Coastal-Marine Research Group, Institute ofNatural
andMathematical Sciences, Massey University, Auckland,
NewZealand
7 Sydney School ofVeterinary Sciences, Charles Perkins
Centre, The University ofSydney, Sydney, Australia

Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
1 3
42 Page 2 of 8
challenges must be overcome including: undertaking
the continuous observations necessary to interpret the
behavior of individuals within highly gregarious but
cryptic social groups (Challenge 1; e.g., Rutz and Hayes
2009); studying species that spend the majority of their
lives underwater (Challenge 2; Marshall 1998; Davis
et al. 1999); working with species characterized by
typically small, curved body sizes and fast and evasive
movements, which provide a narrow window of oppor-
tunity for biologger deployment (Challenge 3); concerns
over the use of invasive pronged satellite biologgers
(Challenge 4; e.g., Andrews etal. 2008); and retrieval of
data for analysis (Challenge 5).
Over the past 20years, animal-borne video cameras
have provided glimpses of fine-scale behaviors that
enabled insights into understanding individual actions
within groups (Moll etal. 2007). Short-term, non-inva-
sive biologgers incorporating animal-borne video cam-
eras have successfully obtained footage from diverse
marine taxa, including: invertebrates (e.g., Passaglia
etal. 1997), sharks (e.g., Heithaus etal. 2001), sea tur-
tles (e.g., Heithaus etal. 2002), seabirds (e.g., Grémillet
etal. 2006), pinnipeds (e.g., Davis etal. 1999), manatees
(e.g., Adimey etal. 2007), and baleen whales (e.g., Wil-
liams et al. 2000). However, biologger deployments in
the aforementioned species were facilitated via use of:
(1) animals with large body sizes and broad, relatively
flat surfaces that facilitated biologger attachment or (2)
the ability to capture and restrain the animals. While
some previous studies (Stone et al. 1994; Hanson and
Baird 1998; Baird etal. 2001; Kaplan etal. 2014; Silva
et al. 2016) succeeded in remotely deploying suction-
cup biologgers on small Cetacea to record diving and
movement patterns, none to our knowledge have utilized
animal-borne video cameras.
Here, we examine the feasibility of remote deploy-
ment of an animal-borne, multi-sensor, suction-cup
biologger (Cetacean-borne Video camera and Integrated
Sensor System or “C-VISS”) on small cetaceans. As pre-
vious impact studies of remote deployment of suction-
cup biologgers in small cetaceans have shown diverse
effects ranging from mild (Stone etal. 1994; Hanson and
Baird 1998; Sakai etal. 2011; Silva etal. 2016) to strong
reactions that led to the abandonment of the method
(Schneider et al. 1998), we will additionally provide
evidence of: (1) the components of our biologger and
field techniques that enabled our success; (2) the differ-
ent individual reactions encountered during attachment
and deployment attempts; (3) the maximum biologger
attachment duration; and (4) the social and environmen-
tal parameters that can be obtained from our biologger.
Materials andmethods
Study species andsite
Our focal species was the dusky dolphin (Lagenorhynchus
obscurus). This small-bodied (maximum length 1.8 m,
maximum weight 85 kg; Cipriano 1992) gregarious spe-
cies has been the focus of long-term study off the coast of
Kaikoura, New Zealand since the mid-1980s (Würsig and
Würsig 2010). Both species and study site were optimal for
developing and testing our biologging method, because:
(1) approximately 2000 dusky dolphins may be found off
Kaikoura at any given time (Markowitz 2004); (2) indi-
viduals form large groups (up to 1000) of mixed age-sex
classes near shore during the day (Markowitz 2004); and
(3) dolphin tourism (Buurman 2010) and regular research
presence (Würsig and Würsig 2010) have habituated the
dolphins to vessel presence.
C-VISS components
C-VISS consists of a syntactic foam float (modified and
customized from a Wildlife Computers base model) to
which a miniaturized video camera, time-depth recorder
(TDR), miniature very high frequency (VHF) and satel-
lite (platform transmitter terminal, PTT) transmitters, and
four silicon suction cups are attached using a combina-
tion of cable ties and screws (Table1; Fig.1a). C-VISS is
positively buoyant and weighted on one end. Thus, C-VISS
rises to the surface upon release from the individual, so
that the antennae sit upright when floating at the surface to
allow tracking for recovery.
The video camera (modeled after Machovsky-Capuska
etal. 2016b) is based around a U10 Mini USB Flash Drive
DVR Camera (Taiwan) with an OV7670 optical sensor
having 36° field-of-view and with a resolution of 720 × 480
pixels captured at 30 frames/s (Fig.1b). The video camera
is powered by a Turnigy nano-tech 600 mAh 1 S lithium
polymer battery which provides a maximum recording
time of c.a. 4h. The deployed video camera generates an
AVI file containing video (MJPG codec) and audio every
30min each of which has a size of approximately 1.2GB
and is written to a 32 GB microSD card. We used a UP
Plus extruded-filament 3D printer (also sold under the
Afinia brand) with ABS plastic filament to produce a close-
fitting case to minimize size and weight while retaining suf-
ficient structural protection. Waterproofing is provided by
inserting the video camera into a Qualatex 646 balloon and
attaching a clear Perspex disk secured with an o-ring to the
lens end. The video camera on/off and recording functions
are operated using a small handheld magnet.
C-VISS is deployed using a 1–2.5 m extendable pole
with a custom-made solid foam core or cradle hollowed out

Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
1 3
Page 3 of 8 42
specifically to fit the biologger (Fig.2). Velcro is used to
attach C-VISS to the cradle on the end of the deployment
pole. Once the suction cups on the underside of the biolog-
ger adhere to the animal, the simultaneous momentum of
the deployment pole being pulled back and the dolphin
swimming away from the pole causes the Velcro between
C-VISS and the cradle to detach. The target area for attach-
ment was the lateral flank cranial to the dorsal fin (Fig.2).
Development andfield validation
C-VISS was developed and validated via a field technique
conducted during five trials (Fig.2). All trials except Trial
3 were conducted in the wild. During the wild dolphin tri-
als, two different 5m rigid hull inflatable boats were used;
one with a 60 hp four-stroke engine and one with a 100 hp
four-stroke engine. Dolphin groups were located with the
naked eye and approached at low speed (≤3 knots), moving
in a direction parallel to the group. Biologger attachment
attempts were made from the bow of the boat on adults as
they swam alongside and near the bow. Trial 3 was con-
ducted at the Vancouver Aquarium (Vancouver, BC),
where one Pacific white-sided dolphin (L. obliquidens) was
housed in an outdoor pool measuring 2.4 × 104m
3 with a
volume of 2.5 × 106L, temperature of 16.1 °C, pH of 7.51,
and salinity of 28.1 ppt. As dusky dolphins do not occur
in captivity, we conducted captive trials on the Pacific
white-sided dolphin, a species of comparable size to dusky
dolphins.
During Trials 1–4, C-VISS was created and we devel-
oped an observational protocol to determine reactions
and potential effects of C-VISS on dolphins. As described
below, we used a stepwise approach to adding compo-
nents to the biologger. The aims of Trials 1–4 were to
test: (1) dusky dolphin reactions to attachment attempts
of a lower profile suction-cup biologgger without a video
camera (Trial 1; see Fig.2); (2) dusky dolphin reactions to
Table 1 C-VISS components, specifications, and approximate costs
Component Dimensions (L × W × H (mm)),
weight (g)
Model and manufacturer Approximate unit cost (USD)
Syntactic foam float with lead
weight
175 × 110 × 20, 152 Modified from AZ-FLOAT-010,
wildlife computers (Redmond,
WA)
$650
Time-depth recorder 33 × 7 × 7, 3 LAT 1500, Sirtrack (Havelock
North, New Zealand)
$1125
PTT/VHF transmitter 20 × 20 × 62 (without antennae), 41 Custom KiwiSat 202, Sirtrack
(Havelock North, New Zealand)
$2000
Video camera 108 × 27 × 27, 68 Custom-made, University of Sydney $1750
Silicon suction cups: 1 large and 3
small
Large: 80 × 80 × 40, 69
Small: 20 × 20 × 12, 3 (each)
Large “saddle cup” and 3 small
“Acousonde” cups, Cetacean
Research Technology (Seattle,
WA)
$90 (large), $45 (small)
Fig. 1 C-VISS components. a Dorsal view of C-VISS. The time-
depth recorder is embedded in the float under the video camera. b
Video camera assembly

Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
1 3
42 Page 4 of 8
attachment attempts of a “dummy” biologger (a model of
similar size to C-VISS but with non-working video cam-
era components) (Trial 2); (3) reactions of a captive Pacific
white-sided dolphin to C-VISS deployments (Trial 3);
and (4) dusky dolphin reactions to attachment attempts of
C-VISS (Trial 4). During Trial 1, the optimal configura-
tion (i.e., number, placement, and combination) of large vs.
small suction cups was also determined; this configuration
(see Table1) was then used during all future trials.
Following Sakai etal. (2011), dusky dolphin reactions
to tagging attempts (measured according to change in an
individual’s behavior pre- vs. post- tagging attempt) dur-
ing Trials 1, 2, and 4 were classified as: (a) “none” when
behavior did not change; (b) “low” when behavior changed
slightly, but there was no apparent vigorous response (e.g.,
dive/swim away); (c) “moderate” when behavior was modi-
fied in a forceful manner (e.g., tail slap); and (d) “strong”
when behavior changed in a succession of forceful move-
ments (e.g., dive away and leap). Reactions were recorded
and classified in the field and verified post-hoc by analyz-
ing video footage (taken via GoPro Hero 3 + Black) of tag-
ging attempts.
When working with the captive Pacific white-sided
dolphin (Trial 3), remote deployment was not used. Thus,
reactions to C-VISS deployments were measured via respi-
ration rate recorded during randomly selected 5-min sam-
pling periods during low-intensity behavior during three
long-term (>30 min) deployments. This is the standard
method used by the Vancouver Aquarium to measure res-
piration rate for this animal (Vancouver Aquarium Marine
Mammal Trainer C. Nagata, pers. comm.).
During Trial 5, C-VISS was successfully deployed
(i.e., remained attached on the animal for >5min). Con-
tinuous VHF tracking was used to maintain the research
vessel within 500m of the group in which the instrumented
individual occurred. We assessed dusky dolphin reactions
to successful C-VISS deployments by determining if the
instrumented individual’s behavior matched overall group
behaviors. For each sighting of the instrumented individual
at the surface, we recorded individual and group behavio-
ral state (foraging, resting, socializing, traveling; Pearson
2009) and distance of the instrumented individual from the
research vessel. To further assess potential impacts of the
biologger, we used C-VISS video footage to measure res-
piration rate (no. surfacings/min, after Cipriano 1992) for
each instrumented animal. To assess proof of concept for
C-VISS, we measured biologger attachment duration across
successful deployments, identified social and environmen-
tal parameters that can be derived from video footage, and
analyzed depth data from the TDR.
Results
Reactions tothebiologger
A total of 165 biologger attachment attempts were con-
ducted during the trials designed to assess wild dolphin
reactions to attachment attempts (Trials 1, 2, and 4). No
negative effects from biologger attachment attempts were
observed during these trials. Most (90%, n = 148) dusky
dolphin reactions to biologger attachment attempts were
classified as “low” (Fig.2). The most commonly observed
behavioral response to biologger attachment attempts was
for the individual to quickly swim or dive away from the
deployment pole. During the captive trial (Trial 3), average
respiration rate for the instrumented animal was 2.1 ± 0.54
SD breaths/min (N = 10 5-min sampling periods, range
Fig. 2 Summary of the trials conducted for validation and deploy-
ment of C-VISS. The graphs depict the primary outcome evaluated
during each trial (Trial 1N = 61, Trial 2 N = 19, Trial 3 N = 10, Trial
4N = 85, Trial 5 N = 8). For Trials 1, 2, and 4, dolphin reactions to
biologger attachment attempts are as defined in the text [none, low,
moderate (mod.), and strong]. For Trial 3, respiration rate was used to
assess individual reaction to biologger attachment

Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
1 3
Page 5 of 8 42
1.8–3.2 breaths/min). This was near to the expected range
of 2.2–3.4 breaths/min for this animal when engaged in
low-intensity behavior (Vancouver Aquarium Marine
Mammal Trainer C. Nagata, pers. comm.) and compara-
ble to values reported for wild Pacific white-sided dolphins
(2.5 ± 0.32 SD breaths/min; Black 1994). In addition, the
instrumented dolphin was observed to perform typical
activities (e.g., playing with an enrichment ball; Fig. 2).
During all surface sightings of instrumented dusky dol-
phins throughout successful deployments during Trial
5, individuals were engaged in the same behavioral state
as the group and exhibited no avoidance relative to the
research vessel. Average respiration rate was 2.6 ± 0.72/min
(N = 8, range 1.61–4.23).
Attachment duration
During Trial 1, 4% (n = 3) of attempts were successful. No
successful attachments were achieved during Trials 2 and 4.
Maximum biologger attachment durations during Trials 1
and 3 were 360 and 255min, respectively, providing initial
proof of concept that suction-cup biologgers can success-
fully be applied to small Cetacea, such as Lagenorhynchus
spp. Total attachment durations during Trials 1 and 3 were
476 min (N = 3, mean = 158.7 ± 174.4 SD, min. = 29)
and 615 min (N = 9, mean = 68.3 ± 85.92 SD, min. = 14),
respectively.
During Trial 5, 12% (n = 8) of attempts were successful.
Total C-VISS attachment duration across eight success-
ful deployments was 566 min (mean = 71.9 ± 96.03 SD,
range 9–299; Fig.2), with a total of 535min of video foot-
age obtained (mean = 66.8 ± 91.10 SD, range 9-284). Total
C-VISS attachment duration exceeded the total duration of
video footage, because the video camera was turned on at
the commencement of biologger attachment attempts, with
some battery power consumed in the period prior to suc-
cessful attachment on the animal.
Social andenvironmental parameters
We identified seven social and environmental parameters
that can be obtained from C-VISS footage: conspecific
body condition (Fig. 3a), mother-calf spatial positioning
according to infant (calf swims underneath its mother) or
echelon (calf swims alongside its mother) position (Mann
and Smuts 1999; Fig. 3b, Video S1), affiliative behavior
Fig. 3 Video stills of social and environmental parameters recorded
by C-VISS. a Conspecific body condition assessed via presence/
absence of wounds/disfigurements. b Mother-calf spatial positioning
categorized as: (1) infant position or (2) echelon position. c Conspe-
cific affiliative behavior identified by flipper rubbing. d Conspecific
sexual behavior identified by an erect penis. e Minimum social index.
Three conspecifics are shown here. f Prey availability determined by
presence and type. g Habitat type assessed by substrate type

Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
1 3
42 Page 6 of 8
(Fig.3c), sexual behavior (Fig.3d), minimum social index
(no. conspecifics in view/min; Fig. 3e, Video S1), prey
(Fig. 3f), and habitat type (Fig. 3g). The average depth
of instrumented individuals recorded by the TDR was
5.6 ± 5.33m (N = 8, max = 46.5).
Discussion
Here, we describe the first study to successfully deploy
an animal-borne video camera on small Cetacea. As pre-
viously described, there are several inherent challenges
to studying fine-scale aspects of cetacean behavior. With
C-VISS, we have overcome these challenges by: (1) inte-
grating a novel combination of sensors that allowed us to
observe the social and environmental interactions of indi-
viduals in large groups while eliminating the potentially
negative effects of a research vessel in close and constant
proximity (Challenges 1–2); (2) creating a custom-made
deployment mechanism and developing a remote-deploy-
ment technique which facilitated success in attaching
the biologger to fast-swimming, free-ranging individu-
als (Challenge 3); (3) using suction cups for non-invasive
attachment (Challenge 4); and (4) integrating coarse-range
(VHF) and fine-range (PTT) transmitters for biologger
retrieval and subsequent data download (Challenge 5).
Importantly, mainly mild reactions to biologging attach-
ment attempts and deployment were observed at the sur-
face, indicating that C-VISS is a safe method for cetaceans
>5m for short duration deployments. Furthermore, while
respiration rates for non-instrumented individual dusky
dolphins are not available (per Challenge 1), the average
respiration rate of instrumented individuals during Trial
5 was similar to that reported for radio-tagged dusky dol-
phins (Cipriano 1992) and Pacific white-sided dolphins
(Black 1994).
Our deployment success rate and mean and maximum
biologger attachment durations during Trial 5 were lower
than that reported in deployments of animal-borne cam-
eras on large cetaceans, such as blue (Balaenoptera mus-
culus; Calambokidis etal. 2007), humpback (Megaptera
novaeangliae; Cade et al. 2016), and sperm (Physeter
macrocephalus; Marshall 1998) whales. However, the
aforementioned species are >5 times longer and >300
times heavier than dusky dolphins (Jefferson etal. 2008)
and typically travel at one-half the speed of dusky dol-
phins (Würsig and Würsig 1980 for dusky dolphins; Wat-
kins etal. 2002 for sperm whales; Bailey etal. 2009 for
blue whales; Horton et al. 2016 for humpback whales),
all of which facilitates biologger deployment and attach-
ment success. Furthermore, animal-borne technology for
large cetaceans has been in development for more than
20 years (Marshall 1998). As we continue to refine the
hydrodynamic design of the biologger and enhance our
deployment technique, we expect that deployment suc-
cess and attachment durations in small cetaceans will
approach those in larger cetaceans.
Over the past 30 years, traditional surface-based obser-
vations have been a primary method for advancing under-
standing of cetacean behavior (Samuels and Tyack 2000).
However, there is limited capacity for tracking fine-scale
individual behaviors for durations >5min in agile, free-
ranging, and gregarious species, such as small cetaceans
(Mann 1999; Whitehead 2004). Our multi-sensor biolog-
ger overcomes this obstacle by allowing researchers to
conduct prolonged focal animal observations (Altmann
1974) to track and record the behavior of the same indi-
vidual amidst a group of hundreds of other individuals.
This information, combined with vertical movements
obtained from diving data and various abiotic (substrate
type, Fig.3f) and biotic (prey availability, Fig.3e; con-
specifics, Fig.3a–d) factors, represents a crucial method-
ological advancement in studying the social and foraging
strategies of small cetaceans.
Findings presented here suggest that C-VISS has
the potential to complement traditional data collection
methods and advance the state of knowledge on dolphin
behavior, particularly with respect to cryptic social and
maternal strategies and their interaction with environ-
mental parameters. We also foresee practical applications
for future cetacean research using animal-borne video
cameras, including: (1) conservation strategies that uti-
lize fine-scale information on interactions between biotic
and abiotic factors and (2) assessment of release success
in rehabilitated cetaceans. Future enhancement of this
biologger should focus on continued evaluation of its
physical and behavioral effects on dolphins, maximiz-
ing attachment duration through continued miniaturiza-
tion, improving hydrodynamic design using 3D printing,
the incorporation of a 360° lens in the camera, and inte-
gration of advanced sensors (inertial measurement unit,
temperature, light, and accelerometer) to further moni-
tor dolphin movements in the context of their physical
environment.
Acknowledgements Thanks to: K. Brown, H. Butcher, A. Fanucci-
Kiss, E. Hill, A. Judkins, and J. Weir for field assistance; S. Gan for
assistance with video analysis; M. Morrissey/Department of Conser-
vation (DOC) and B. and M. Würsig for use of their research vessels
and other field support; and the Vancouver Aquarium marine mam-
mal trainers for their assistance during the captive trials. Funding was
provided by a National Geographic Society/Waitt Fund Grant; the
Encounter Foundation; the Faculty of Veterinary Science and School
of Electrical and Information Engineering, The University of Sydney;
the Herchel Smith-Harvard Undergraduate Science Research Pro-
gram; and the University of Alaska Southeast. This material is also
based in part upon work supported by the Alaska NASA EPSCoR
Program (NNX13AB28A).

Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
1 3
Page 7 of 8 42
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest All authors declare that they have no conflicts
of interest.
Ethical approval All applicable international, national, and/or insti-
tutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All
procedures performed in studies involving animals were in accordance
with the ethical standards of the institution or practice at which the
studies were conducted. This study was conducted under University of
Alaska Fairbanks IACUC 490961-8, Massey University Animal Eth-
ics Committee approval MU13/90, and DOC permit 37696-MAR. The
authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. This article does not
contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the
authors.
References
Adimey N, Abernathy K, Gaspard JC III, Marshall G (2007) Meet-
ing the manatee challenge: the feasibility of using CRIT-
TERCAM on wild manatees. Mar Technol Soc J 41:14–18.
doi:10.4031/002533207787442015
Altmann J (1974) Observation study of behavior: sampling methods.
Behaviour 49:227–267
Andrews RD, Pittman RL, Balance LT (2008) Satellite tracking
reveals distinct movement patterns for Type B and Type C killer
whales in the southern Ross Sea, Antarctica. Polar Biol 31:1461–
1468. doi:10.1007/s00300-008-0487-z
Bailey H, Mate BR, Palacios DM, Irvine L, Bograd SJ, Costa DP
(2009) Behavioural estimation of blue whale movements in the
Northeast Pacific from state-space model analysis of satellite
tracks. Endanger Species Res 10:93–106
Baird RW, Ligon AD, Hooker SK, Gorgone AM (2001) Subsur-
face and nighttime behaviour of pantropical spotted dolphins in
Hawai’i. Can J Zool 79:988–996. doi:10.1139/z01-070
Black N (1994) Behavior and ecology of Pacific white-sided dolphins
(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens) in Monterey Bay, California. The-
sis, San Francisco State University
Buurman D (2010) Dolphin swimming and watching: one tourism
operator’s perspective. In: Würsig B, Würsig M (eds) The dusky
dolphin: master acrobat off different shores. Academic, San
Diego, pp277–290
Cade DE, Friedlaender AS, Calambokidis J, Goldbogen JA (2016)
Kinematic diversity in rorqual whale feeding mechanisms. Curr
Biol 26:1–8
Calambokidis J, Schorr GS, Steiger GH, Francis J, Bakhtiari M,
Marshall G, Oleson EM, Gendron D, Robertson K (2007)
Insights into the underwater diving, feeding, and calling
behavior of blue whales from a suction-cup-attached video-
imaging tag (CRITTERCAM). Mar Technol Soc J 41:19–29.
doi:10.4031/002533207787441980
Cipriano FW (1992) Behavior and occurrence patterns, feeding ecol-
ogy and life history of dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscu-
rus) off Kaikoura, New Zealand. Dissertation, University of
Arizona
Davis RW, Fuiman LA, Williams TM, Collier SO, Hagey WP,
Kanatous SB, Kohin S, Horning M (1999) Hunting behavior of a
marine mammal beneath the Antarctic fast ice. Science 283:993–
996. doi:10.1126/science.283.5404.993
Dudzinski K (1998). Contact behavior in signal exchange in Atlantic
spotted dolphins (Stenella frontalis). Aquat Mamm 24:129–142
Grémillet D, Enstipp MR, Boudiffa M, Liu H (2006) Do cormo-
rants injure fish without eating them? An underwater video
study. Mar Biol 148:1081–1087
Hanson MB, Baird RW (1998) Dall’s porpoise reactions to tag-
ging attempts using a remotely-deployed suction-cup tag. Mar
Technol Soc J 32:18–23
Hays GC, Ferreira LC, Sequeira AMM etal (2016) Key questions
in marine megafauna movement ecology. Trends Ecol Evol.
doi:10.1016/j.tree.2016.02.015
Heithaus MR, Marshall GJ, Buhleier BM, Dill LM (2001) Employ-
ing Crittercam to study habitat use and behavior of large
sharks. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 209:307–310
Heithaus MR, McLash JJ, Frid A, Dill LM, Marshall GJ (2002)
Novel insights into green sea turtle behaviour using animal-
borne video cameras. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 82:1049–1050.
doi:10.1017/S0025315402006689
Horton TW, Holdaway RN, Zerbini AN, Hauser N, Garrigue C,
Andriolo A, Clapham PJ (2016) Straight as an arrow: hump-
back whales swim constant course tracks during long-distance
migration. Biol Lett. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2011.0279
Jefferson TA, Webber MA, Pitman RL (2008) Marine mammals of
the world: a comprehensive guide to their identification. Aca-
demic, San Francisco
Kaplan MB, Mooney TA, Sayigh LS, Baird RW (2014) Repeated
call types in Hawaiian melon-headed whales (Peponocephala
electra). J Acoust Soc Am 136:1394–1401
Machovsky-Capuska G, Coogan SCP, Simpson SJ, Raubenheimer
D (2016a) Motive for killing: what drives prey choice in wild
predators? Ethology 122:703–711
Machovsky-Capuska G, Priddel D, Leong PHW, Jones P, Carlile N,
Shannon L, Portelli D, McEwan A, Chaves AV, Raubenheimer
D (2016b) Coupling bio-logging with nutritional geometry to
reveal novel insights into the foraging behaviour of a plunge-
diving marine predator. New Zeal J Mar Freshw. doi:10.1080/0
0288330.2016.1152981
Mann J (1999) Behavioral sampling methods for cetaceans:
a review and critique. Mar Mamm Sci 15:102–122.
doi:10.1111/j.1748-7692.1999.tb00784.x
Mann J, Smuts B (1999) Behavioral development in wild bottlenose
dolphin newborns (Tursiops sp.). Behaviour 136:529–566.
doi:10.1163/156853999501469
Markowitz TM (2004) Social organization of the New Zealand
dusky dolphin. Dissertation, Texas A&M University
Marshall G (1998) Crittercam: an animal-borne imaging and data
logging system. Mar Tech Soc 32:11–17
Moll RJ, Millspaugh JJ, Beringer J, Sartwell J, He Z (2007) A new
‘view’ of ecology and conservation through animal-borne
video systems. Trends Ecol Evol 22:660–668. doi:10.1016/j.
tree.2007.09.007
Passaglia C, Dodge F, Herzong E, Jackson S, Barlow R (1997)
Deciphering a neural code for vision. Proc Natl Acad Sci
94:12649–12654
Pearson HC (2009) Influences on dusky dolphin fission-fusion
dynamics in Admiralty Bay, New Zealand. Behav Ecol Socio-
biol 63:1437–1446. doi:10.1007/s00265-009-0821-7
Rutz C, Hayes GC (2009) New frontiers in biologging science. Biol
Lett 5:289–292
Sakai M, Karczmarski L, Morisaka T, Thornton M (2011) Reac-
tions of Heaviside’s dolphins to tagging attempts using
remotely-deployed suction-cup tags. S Afr J Wildl Res
41:134–138. doi:10.3957/056.041.0116
Samuels A, Tyack P (2000) Flukeprints: a history of studying
cetacean societies. In: Mann J, Connor RC, Tyack PL, White-
head H (eds) Cetacean societies: field studies of dolphins and
whales. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp9–44

Mar Biol (2017) 164:42
1 3
42 Page 8 of 8
Schneider K, Baird RW, Dawson S, Visser I, Childerhouse S (1998)
Reactions of bottlenose dolphins to tagging attempts using a
remotely-deployed suction-cup tag. Mar Mamm Sci 14:316–324.
doi:10.1111/j.1748-7692.1998.tb00720.x
Silva TA, Mooney TA, Sayigh LS, Baird RW, Tyack PL (2016) Suc-
cessful suction-cup tagging of a small delphinid species,Stenella
attenuata: insights into whistle characteristics. Mar Mamm Sci.
doi:10.1111/mms.12376
Stone GS, Goodyear J, Hutt A, Yoshinaga A (1994) A new non-inva-
sive tagging method for studying wild dolphins. Mar Technol
Soc J 28:11–16
Watkins WA, Daher MA, Dimarzio NA, Samuels A, Wartzok D, Fris-
trup KM, Howey PW, Maiefski RR. (2002). Sperm whale dives
tracked by radio tag telemetry. Mar Mamm Sci 18:55–68.
Whitehead H (2004) The group strikes back: follow protocols for
behavioral research on cetaceans. Mar Mamm Sci 20: 664–670
Williams TM, Davis RW, Fuiman LA, Francis J, Le Boeuf BJ, Horn-
ing M, Calambokidis J, Croll DA (2000) Sink or swim: strategies
for cost-efficient diving by marine mammals. Science 288:133–
136. doi:10.1126/science.288.5463.133
Würsig B, Würsig M (1980) Behavior and ecology of the dusky dol-
phin, Lagenorhynchus obscurus, in the South Atlantic. Fish Bull
77:871–890
Würsig B, Würsig M (2010) The dusky dolphin: master acrobat off
different shores. Academic, San Diego