Oral Presentation Australian Society for Fish Biology Conference 2025

Integrating Remotely Operated Vehicles into Elasmobranch Research: A Pilot Assessment of Methodological Performance (124705)

Martina Lonati 1 , Adam Barnett 1 , Stacy Bierwagen 2 , Jonathan Smart 3 , Melissa Ciampaglia 3 , Vincent Free 1 , Eric Fisher 3 , Andrew Hoey 3 , Gemma Galbraith 3 , Benjamin Cresswell 3 , Andrew Chin 3
  1. Biopixel Ocean Foundation, Townsville City, QLD, Australia
  2. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, QLD, Australia
  3. James Cook University, North Ward, QLD, Australia

 

Background

Effective conservation and fisheries management rely on robust biological data collected using methods suited to the target species, habitat, and research objective. In elasmobranch studies, techniques range from catch-based approaches to non-invasive methods like visual surveys and remote video systems. Emerging technologies, such as underwater drones, offer opportunities to combine the strengths of these approaches while extending survey coverage across broader spatial and temporal scales. Remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) are particularly promising for accessing habitats and conditions beyond the reach of traditional techniques.

Aims

This study evaluates the potential of ROVs for surveying elasmobranchs and compares their effectiveness to established techniques. The primary goal was to modify observation-class ROVs for elasmobranch-specific monitoring. We assessed ROV performance across temporal and spatial gradients relative to three widely used survey methods: UVS, BRUVs, and catch data. Rather than identifying the best method, we aimed to contextualise ROV data within existing frameworks.

Methods

A BlueROV2 was customised with four top-mounted GoPros for 360° video coverage and bottom-mounted torches for crepuscular and nocturnal surveys. Four pilot experiments were conducted across varying habitats and conditions. In three, ROVs were compared to other methods; the fourth tested ROV performance at night. Performance was evaluated based on species richness and relative abundance detected.

Results

ROVs produced data comparable to diver-based transects and offered advantages including deeper access, night survey capability, and enhanced safety. ROVs also complemented BRUVs and catch surveys by improving abundance and occurrence estimates. The iterative process revealed practical insights on optimising survey design in strong currents, and the four-camera setup proved especially useful, capturing individuals missed by forward-facing cameras.

Conclusion

Overall, this study provides practical guidance and best practices for ROV-based elasmobranch surveys and highlights the value of integrating ROVs into traditional survey frameworks to address spatial and temporal limitations in elasmobranch research.

  1. Baronio, M. (2012). The use of a micro remotely operated vehicle as a tool for studies of shark behaviour and diver impact. Southern Cross University. https://researchportal.scu.edu.au/esploro/outputs/doctoral/The-use-of-a-micro-remotely/991012820826
  2. Butcher, P. A., Colefax, A. P., Gorkin, R. A., Kajiura, S. M., López, N. A., Mourier, J., Purcell, C. R., Skomal, G. B., Tucker, J. P., & Walsh, A. J. (2021). The drone revolution of shark science: a review. Drones, 5(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones5010008
  3. Cheal, A. J., Emslie, M. J., Currey-Randall, L. M., & Heupel, M. R. (2021). Comparability and complementarity of reef fish measures from underwater visual census (UVC) and baited remote underwater video stations (BRUVS). Journal of Environmental Management, 289, 112375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112375
  4. Galbraith, G., McClure, E., Barnett, A., Cresswell, B., Burn, D., Huertas, V., Pratchett, M., & Hoey, A. (2022). Diving into the Deep: The Unique Deep Habitats of the Coral Sea Marine Park. Parks Australia. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10516.68487/1
  5. Hammerschlag, N., Skubel, R., Calich, H., Nelson, E., Shiffman, D., Wester, J., Macdonald, C., Cain, S., Jennings, L., & Enchelmaier, A. (2017). Nocturnal and crepuscular behavior in elasmobranchs: a review of movement, habitat use, foraging, and reproduction in the dark. Bulletin of Marine Science, 93(2), 355-374. https://doi.org/10.5343/bms.2016.1046
  6. Jessop, S. A., Saunders, B. J., Goetze, J. S., & Harvey, E. S. (2022). A comparison of underwater visual census, baited, diver operated and remotely operated stereo video for sampling shallow water reef fishes. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 276, 108017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2022.108017
  7. Kilfoil, J. P., Wirsing, A. J., Campbell, M. D., Kiszka, J. J., Gastrich, K. R., Heithaus, M. R., Zhang, Y., & Bond, M. E. (2017). Baited Remote Underwater Video surveys undercount sharks at high densities: Insights from full-spherical camera technologies. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 585, 113-121. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12395
  8. Maslin, M., Louis, S., Godary Dejean, K., Lapierre, L., Villéger, S., & Claverie, T. (2021). Underwater robots provide similar fish biodiversity assessments as divers on coral reefs. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation, 7(4), 567-578. https://doi.org/10.1002/rse2.209
  9. McLean, D. L., Green, M., Harvey, E. S., Williams, A., Daley, R., & Graham, K. J. (2015a). Comparison of baited longlines and baited underwater cameras for assessing the composition of continental slope deepwater fish assemblages off southeast Australia. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 98, 10-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsr.2014.11.013
  10. Schramm, K. D., Harvey, E. S., Goetze, J. S., Travers, M. J., Warnock, B., & Saunders, B. J. (2020). A comparison of stereo-BRUV, diver operated and remote stereo-video transects for assessing reef fish assemblages. Journal of experimental marine biology and ecology, 524, 151273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2019.151273
  11. Sward, D., Monk, J., & Barrett, N. (2019). A systematic review of remotely operated vehicle surveys for visually assessing fish assemblages. Frontiers in Marine Science, 6, 134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00134