Abstract
Driven by technological advancements and reduced costs, biologging has seen a rapid growth transforming the study of animal behaviour and ecology providing unprecedented insights into wildlife, aiding conservation efforts and ecological research. However, in the wake of the rapid growth loom pressing ethical and methodological challenges, including a lack of error reporting, inconsistent standards, and insufficient consideration of animal welfare. Here we highlight the urgent need for a robust error culture in biologging to address these issues. We propose four key directions for action: (1) establishing a biologging expert registry to enhance collaboration and knowledge sharing; (2) implementing pre-registration as well as post-reporting of studies and devices to reduce publication bias and improve transparency; (3) demanding industry standards for biologging devices to ensure reliability and minimize harm; and (4) developing educational programs and ethical guidelines tailored to the unique challenges of biologging research. By continuing a more rigorous implementation of a 5R principle —Replace, Reduce, Refine, Responsibility, and Reuse (data)— alongside these initiatives, the biologging community can balance technological progress with ethical responsibility. These measures aim to improve research quality, safeguard animal welfare, and foster a sustainable future for this critical field.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.32942/X21066
Subjects
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Life Sciences
Keywords
movement ecology, wildlife engineering, animal ethics, animal experiments, wearables. GPS devices, animal marking., wildlife engineering, animal ethics, animal experiments, wearables, GPS devices, animal marking
Dates
Published: 2025-05-15 12:18
Last Updated: 2025-08-14 12:45
Older Versions
License
CC-BY Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
Additional Metadata
Conflict of interest statement:
None
Data and Code Availability Statement:
No data and code are available as this is a perspectives piece
Language:
English
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.