A comparison of two survey methods: differences between underwater visual census and baited remote underwater video

173 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A little bait goes a long way: The influence of bait quantity on a temperate fish assemblage sampled using stereo-BRUVs (2013, methodology): “With regard to bait, previous studies have used crushed, chopped, whole, frozen and thawed forms of bait, as well as differing quantities, ranging from 200 g to 2000 g (Birt et al., 2012; Colton and Swearer, 2010; Willis and Babcock, 2000; Zintzen et al., 2011, 2012).”
Bait type affects fish assemblages and feeding guilds observed at baited remote underwater video stations (2013, background): “Our data support the assertion of Colton & Swearer (2010), 196 Wraith et al.: Bait type affects BRUVS with herbivores poorly represented as a feeding guild and then only appearing consistently in the presence of pilchard bait.”
What is Big BRUVver up to? Methods and uses of baited underwater video (2017, methodology): “Another study used infrared light to assess nocturnal fish assemblages and compared these results to those from UVC (Bassett and Montgomery 2011).”