+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Evaluation of two methods to estimate and monitor bird populations



Evaluation of two methods to estimate and monitor bird populations



Plos One 3(8): E3047-E3047



Background Effective management depends upon accurately estimating trends in abundance of bird populations over time, and in some cases estimating abundance. Two population estimation methods, double observer (DO) and double sampling (DS), have been advocated for avian population studies and the relative merits and short-comings of these methods remain an area of debate. Methodology/Principal Findings We used simulations to evaluate the performances of these two population estimation methods under a range of realistic scenarios. For three hypothetical populations with different levels of clustering, we generated DO and DS population size estimates for a range of detection probabilities and survey proportions. Population estimates for both methods were centered on the true population size for all levels of population clustering and survey proportions when detection probabilities were greater than 20%. The DO method underestimated the population at detection probabilities less than 30% whereas the DS method remained essentially unbiased. The coverage probability of 95% confidence intervals for population estimates was slightly less than the nominal level for the DS method but was substantially below the nominal level for the DO method at high detection probabilities. Differences in observer detection probabilities did not affect the accuracy and precision of population estimates of the DO method. Population estimates for the DS method remained unbiased as the proportion of units intensively surveyed changed, but the variance of the estimates decreased with increasing proportion intensively surveyed. Conclusions/Significance The DO and DS methods can be applied in many different settings and our evaluations provide important information on the performance of these two methods that can assist researchers in selecting the method most appropriate for their particular needs.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 037419516

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 18728775

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003047


Related references

An evaluation of the Waterways Bird Survey as a monitor of regional and national populations of waterbirds, and an appraisal of its future role. BTO Research Report 15(5): 1-59, 1995

Can ringing data from bird observatories be used to monitor bird populations?. Var Fuglefauna Supplement 1: 17-20, 1993

Using insect sounds to estimate and monitor their populations. Florida Entomologist 71(4): 416-426, 1988

Counting migrants to monitor bird populations: state of the art. U S Forest Service General Technical Report PSW: 191: 712-717, 2005

The use of Christmas bird count data to monitor populations of exotic birds. American Birds (Christmas Bird Count): 102: 24-28, 2002

Corrections to traditional methods of verifying tangential-breast 3D monitor-unit calculations: use of an equivalent triangle to estimate effective fields. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 4(1): 51-57, 2003

Comparing three methods to monitor commensal bat populations roosting in structures. Bat Research News 42(4): 167, Winter, 2001

Dendrometric bases and methods for the estimate of absolute insect populations. Eidgenoessische Anstalt fuer das Forstliche Versuchswesen Mitteilungen 50(2): (1975) 85-132, 1974

Methods and their evaluation to estimate the vitamin B6-status in human subjects. V. S-PLP-determination: method and comparison of methods. International journal for vitamin and nutrition research3(2): 156-165, 1983

Long-term use of breeding bird census plots to monitor populations of neotropical migrants breeding in deciduous forests in eastern Pennsylvania, USA. Forest biodiversity in North, Central and South America, and the Caribbean: research and monitoring: 149-164, 1998

A comparison of methods to estimate the distribution of low-density black bear populations. Transactions of the Northeast Section of the Wildlife Society 48: 15-20, 1991

Assessing aerial survey methods to estimate elk populations: A case study. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28(3): 636-642, Fall, 2000

Methods and their evaluation to estimate the vitamin b 6 status in human subjects 5. s pyridoxal 5 phosphate determination method and comparison of methods. International Journal for Vitamin and Nutrition Research 53(2): 156-165, 1983

Potential methods to monitor human populations exposed to carcinogens carcinogen dna binding as an example. Hoel, D G , R A Merrill And F P Perera (Ed ) Banbury Report, 19 Risk Quantitation And Regulatory Policy; Meeting, Cold Spring Harbor, N Y , Usa, May 1984 Xi+368p Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory: Cold Spring Harbor, N Y , Usa Illus 211-230, 1985

Methods for estimating bird populations. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 72(2): 271-283, 1975