The burden of a failed error culture in biologging

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 2,223 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 2 sections · click to expand

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.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00