Jump to content


Photo

Weird results


Best Answer Eldar , 30 October 2017 - 02:49 PM

   Hi Ana,

 I looked at your data and it looks like you have some problems with the calibration times:

try

Calibration.periods<-data.frame(  
  calibration.start=as.POSIXct(c(NA, "2014-10-20")),   
  calibration.stop=as.POSIXct(c("2014-04-10", NA)),
  lon=-74.51644, lat=4.36459) 
 
This will create you following data.frame:
 
  calibration.start calibration.stop       lon     lat
1              <NA>       2014-04-10 -74.51644 4.36459
2        2014-10-20             <NA> -74.51644 4.36459
 
First line makes first calibration period and second line second.
  Results look ok in this case but some outliers still remain.
  Hope it helps,
    Eldar
Go to the full post


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 agonzalez

agonzalez
  • Society Members
  • 7 posts
  • White Rock, BC,
  • Canada

Posted 16 October 2017 - 02:21 PM

Hi everyone,

I used FlightR to analyze seven tags from Thrushes tagged in South America and it worked pretty well.

Now, I'm running a tag for a different Thrush species (I know this species migrates way slower than the first one) but the results don't seem to make sense.

When I plot the results the bird is all over the map and the migratory path is like a zigzag. 

The light data is very clean, and I'm doing exactly what I did for the first species.

Has anyone run into the same issue? I really don't know what to do to improve the results.

Any advice will be appreciated.

Thanks!

Ana



#2 Eldar

Eldar
  • General Members
  • 47 posts
  • Netherlands,
  • Netherlands

Posted 17 October 2017 - 02:11 AM

  Hi Ana,

 Could you please send me your script, TAGS formatted csv and the Result file (through wetransfer or googledrive)? I will have  a look then.



#3 Eldar

Eldar
  • General Members
  • 47 posts
  • Netherlands,
  • Netherlands

Posted 30 October 2017 - 02:49 PM   Best Answer

   Hi Ana,

 I looked at your data and it looks like you have some problems with the calibration times:

try

Calibration.periods<-data.frame(  
  calibration.start=as.POSIXct(c(NA, "2014-10-20")),   
  calibration.stop=as.POSIXct(c("2014-04-10", NA)),
  lon=-74.51644, lat=4.36459) 
 
This will create you following data.frame:
 
  calibration.start calibration.stop       lon     lat
1              <NA>       2014-04-10 -74.51644 4.36459
2        2014-10-20             <NA> -74.51644 4.36459
 
First line makes first calibration period and second line second.
  Results look ok in this case but some outliers still remain.
  Hope it helps,
    Eldar


#4 agonzalez

agonzalez
  • Society Members
  • 7 posts
  • White Rock, BC,
  • Canada

Posted 08 November 2017 - 06:22 PM

Hi Eldar,

Thanks so much for your help. I'll be more conservative when using the graph resulting from "plot_slopes_by_location" to select my calibration periods. 

Any advice to deal with the outliers?

Thanks again,

Ana






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members(s), 0 guests(s) and 0 anonymous member(s)