Anne Berger

Dr. Anne Berger

Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Department of Evolutionary Ecology, Berlin, Germany
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

29Years (1998-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
26 December 2019 in Journal of Animal Ecology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NBNadège C Bonnot
Nadège C Bonnot
OCOphélie Couriot
Ophélie Couriot
Anne BergerAnne Berger
Anne Berger
FCFrancesca Cagnacci
Francesca Cagnacci
SCSimone Ciuti
Simone Ciuti
AHA J Mark Hewison
A J Mark Hewison

1 April 1999 in Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Anne BergerAnne Berger
Anne Berger
KSKlaus-M Scheibe
Klaus-M Scheibe
KEKnut Eichhorn
Knut Eichhorn
ASAnnemarie Scheibe
Annemarie Scheibe
JSJürgen Streich
Jürgen Streich

9 May 2019 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MHM. P. G. Hofman
M. P. G. Hofman
MHM. W. Hayward
M. W. Hayward
MHM. Heim
M. Heim
PMP. Marchand
P. Marchand
CRC. M. Rolandsen
C. M. Rolandsen
NBN. Balkenhol
N. Balkenhol
Satellite telemetry is an increasingly utilized technology in wildlife research, and current devices can track individual animal movements at unprecedented spatial and temporal resolutions. However, as we enter the golden age of satellite telemetry, we need an in-depth understanding of the main technological, species-specific and environmental factors that determine the success and failure of satellite tracking devices across species and habitats. Here, we assess the relative influence of such factors on the ability of satellite telemetry units to provide the expected amount and quality of data by analyzing data from over 3,000 devices deployed on 62 terrestrial species in 167 projects worldwide. We evaluate the success rate in obtaining GPS fixes as well as in transferring these fixes to the user and we evaluate failure rates. Average fix success and data transfer rates were high and were generally better predicted by species and unit characteristics, while environmental characteristics influenced the variability of performance. However, 48% of the unit deployments ended prematurely, half of them due to technical failure. Nonetheless, this study shows that the performance of satellite telemetry applications has shown improvements over time, and based on our findings, we provide further recommendations for both users and manufacturers.

5 May 2020 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
WRWanja Rast
Wanja Rast
SKSophia Elisabeth Kimmig
Sophia Elisabeth Kimmig
LGLisa Giese
Lisa Giese
Anne BergerAnne Berger
Anne Berger
1. Remotely tracking distinct behaviours of animals using acceleration data and machine learning has been carried out successfully in several species in captive settings. In order to study the ecology of animals in natural habitats, such behaviour classification models need to be transferred to wild individuals. However, at present, the development of those models usually requires direct observation of the target animals. 2. The goal of this study was to infer the behaviour of wild, free-roaming animals from acceleration data by training behaviour classification models on captive individuals, without the necessity to observe their wild conspecifics. We further sought to develop methods to validate the credibility of the resulting behaviour extrapolations. 3. We trained two machine learning algorithms proposed by the literature, Random Forest (RF) and Support Vector Machine (SVM), on data from captive red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and later applied them to data from wild foxes. We also tested a new advance for behaviour classification, by applying a moving window to an Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Finally, we investigated four strategies to validate our classification output. 4. While all three machine learning algorithms performed well under training conditions (Kappa values: RF (0.82), SVM (0.78), ANN (0.85)), the established methods, RF and SVM, failed in classifying distinct behaviours when transferred from captive to wild foxes. Behaviour classification with the ANN and a moving window, in contrast, inferred distinct behaviours and showed consistent results for most individuals. 5. Our approach is a substantial improvement over the methods previously proposed in the literature as it generated plausible results for wild fox behaviour. We were able to infer the behaviour of wild animals that have never been observed in the wild and to further illustrate the credibility of the output. This framework is not restricted to foxes but can be applied to infer the behaviour of many other species and thus empowers new advances in behavioural ecology.

1 March 2021 in Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AGAnnegret Grimm-Seyfarth
Annegret Grimm-Seyfarth
WHWiebke Harms
Wiebke Harms
Anne BergerAnne Berger
Anne Berger
Over the last century, dogs have been increasingly used to detect rare and elusive species or traces of them. The use of wildlife detection dogs (WDD) is particularly well‐established in North America, Europe and Oceania, and projects deploying them have increased world‐wide. However, if they are to make a significant contribution to conservation and management, their strengths, abilities and limitations should be fully identified. We reviewed the use of WDD with particular focus on the breeds used in different countries and for various targets, as well as their overall performance compared to other methods, by developing and analysing a database of 1,220 publications, including 916 scientific ones, covering 2,464 individual cases—most of them (1,840) scientific. With the world‐wide increase in the use of WDD, associated tasks have changed and become much more diverse. Since 1930, reports exist for 62 countries and 408 animal, 42 plant, 26 fungi and six bacteria species. Altogether, 108 FCI‐classified and 20 non‐FCI‐classified breeds have worked as WDD. While certain breeds have been preferred on different continents and for specific tasks and targets, they were not generally better suited for detection tasks than others. Overall, WDD usually worked more effectively than other monitoring methods. For each species group, regardless of breed, detection dogs were better than other methods in 88.71% of all cases and only worse in 0.98%. It was only for arthropods that Pinshers and Schnauzers performed worse than other breeds. For mono‐ and dicotyledons, detection dogs did less often outperform other methods. Although every breed can be trained as a WDD, choosing the most suitable dog for the task and target may speed up training and increase the chance of success. Albeit selection of the most appropriate WDD is important, excellent training, knowledge about the target density and suitability, and a proper study design all appeared to have the highest impact on performance. Moreover, an appropriate area, habitat and weather are crucial for detection dog work. When these factors are taken into consideration, WDD can be an outstanding monitoring method.

2 January 2013 in Italian Journal of Zoology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AKA. Krop-Benesch
A. Krop-Benesch
Anne BergerAnne Berger
Anne Berger
HHH. Hofer
H. Hofer
Marco HeurichMarco Heurich
Marco Heurich
The investigation of activity patterns provides crucial information on the ecology of a species, yet there are very few long-term data available from free-ranging species. Here, we present the first continuous activity data of free-ranging roe deer covering an entire calendar year. Six male and five female roe deer in the National Park Bavarian Forest, Germany, were equipped with GPS collars containing a two-axis accelerometer. Activity data were analysed for daily activity patterns and their seasonal changes. Daily activity patterns resembled the patterns described in earlier VHF-telemetry based studies, but instead of a pure active/inactive discrimination, the level of activity was obtained continuously, allowing a more precise study of activity intensity. Activity was observed at all daytimes, but was most intense at twilight. These twilight peaks were less pronounced in winter. The intensity of activity showed stronger seasonal changes than the number and duration of activity bouts. Mean daily activity levels and the number of activity peaks per day were lower in winter than in spring and summer. Mean duration of activity peaks did not change during the year. At all seasons, activity had a significant 24-hour periodicity, but the time of its emphasis changed. The roe deer was most diurnal during winter, and most nocturnal in autumn. In spring and summer, activity was evenly distributed between day and night. Seasonal changes in activity could be explained by seasonal changes in physiological parameters and in environmental changes, especially food supply and climate.