2010
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01901.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can the abundance of tigers be assessed from their signs?

Abstract: Summary1. Indices of abundance offer cost effective and rapid methods for estimating abundance of endangered species across large landscapes, yet their wide usage is controversial due to their potential of being biased. Here, we assess the utility of indices for the daunting task of estimating the abundance of the endangered tiger at landscape scales. 2. We use double sampling to estimate two indices of tiger abundance (encounters of pugmarks and scats per km searched) and calibrate those indices against conte… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
98
3

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 76 publications
(101 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
98
3
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the precision of such estimates can be poor, resulting in large intervals of possible abundances, which can hinder their use in assessing population status and trends. Despite these problems, monitoring of carnivores in Africa still often relies on attempts to locally calibrate counts or indices (Funston et al 2010;Thorn et al 2010;Bauer et al 2014;Henschel et al 2014;Midlane et al 2015), even though there is a strong record of failure with track index validation for multiple species across many regions (Ruscoe et al 2001;Blackwell et al 2002;Jhala et al 2011;Karanth et al 2011;Katzner et al 2011;Watts et al 2011;Sollmann et al 2013a), and especially for carnivores with typically very low detection rates . In Africa in particular, track indices are considered ineffective at estimating absolute abundance (Balme et al 2009;Biodivers Conserv Thorn et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In addition, the precision of such estimates can be poor, resulting in large intervals of possible abundances, which can hinder their use in assessing population status and trends. Despite these problems, monitoring of carnivores in Africa still often relies on attempts to locally calibrate counts or indices (Funston et al 2010;Thorn et al 2010;Bauer et al 2014;Henschel et al 2014;Midlane et al 2015), even though there is a strong record of failure with track index validation for multiple species across many regions (Ruscoe et al 2001;Blackwell et al 2002;Jhala et al 2011;Karanth et al 2011;Katzner et al 2011;Watts et al 2011;Sollmann et al 2013a), and especially for carnivores with typically very low detection rates . In Africa in particular, track indices are considered ineffective at estimating absolute abundance (Balme et al 2009;Biodivers Conserv Thorn et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Within the last century, the number of wild tigers has declined rapidly from an estimated 100 000 individuals in the early 1900s [1] to the most recent estimate of 3800-5180 individuals globally [2], with fewer than 1850 tigers in South Asia [3,4]. Tigers now occupy only 7.1% of their historical range [5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Accurate information on copious and gradual alterations in copiousness is highly important for the effective management of endangered species (Gibbs 1999). Assessment of copiousness for any sly species having low density and wide ranging is highly required in terms and resources (Jhala 2011). Today, though the whole world is concerning towards conservation of big carnivores with respect to their ambient ecosystem, but yet no concrete success we have got to check their continual declinations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%