Visual censuses of tropical fish aggregations on artificial reefs: slate versus video recording techniques

By E. Tessier, P. Chabanet, K. Pothin, M. Soria, G. Lasserre. 2005

90 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 comparison of temperate reef fish assemblages recorded by three underwater stereo-video techniques (2005, background): “Willis et al. 2000; Willis and Babcock 2000; Cappo et al. 2004; Harvey et al. 2004; Tessier et al. 2005 ).”
Cost-efficient sampling of fish assemblages: comparison of baited video stations and diver video transects (2010, background): “However, traditional diver-based visual methods tend to obtain greater species richness than either horizontally facing baited video stations or diver-operated video methods, due to the advantages of the human eye (Le Grand 1968) over video technologies (Tessier et al. 2005).”
Underwater video techniques for observing coastal marine biodiversity: A review of sixty years of publications (1952–2012) (2014, background): “…(Watson et al., 2005), and UVC (Willis and 401 Babcock, 2000), while others show that more fish species were detected with UVC than with 402 BRUV (Tessier et al., 2005; Langlois et al., 2006; Stobart et al., 2007; Colton and Swearer, 403 2010; Lowry et al., 2012) and DOV (Greene and Alevizon,…”