2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11252-014-0344-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Old and novel methods for estimating Feral Pigeons (Columba livia f. domestica) population size: a reply to Amoruso et al. (2013)

Abstract: In a recent paper Amoruso et al. (2013) proposed a novel method for estimating\ud population size of Feral Pigeons, the Superimposed Urban Strata (SUS) method. In our reply\ud we firstly comment on the lack of a complete review of the available literature. Secondly we\ud point out that the SUS method does not account for birds detection probability and thus it is\ud just a simple index of abundance as many others proposed in recent years. Thirdly, we\ud question the approach used by the authors to evaluate the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The increasing trend that was registered in the control group corresponds with the increasing trend obtained from the pigeon surveys that were conducted in the city of Barcelona when no control strategy was in effect (2015 survey: 85,777+/−10,028 pigeons; 2017 survey: 103,226+/−14,353 pigeons [ 26 ]). Despite the criticism of the survey method, due to its estimation of the pigeon population in a city as a whole instead of independent colonies, the use of controversial indexes and high confidence intervals (15% CI provided) [ 27 , 28 ], the results were considered as supportive information for the study and as an index of relative abundance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increasing trend that was registered in the control group corresponds with the increasing trend obtained from the pigeon surveys that were conducted in the city of Barcelona when no control strategy was in effect (2015 survey: 85,777+/−10,028 pigeons; 2017 survey: 103,226+/−14,353 pigeons [ 26 ]). Despite the criticism of the survey method, due to its estimation of the pigeon population in a city as a whole instead of independent colonies, the use of controversial indexes and high confidence intervals (15% CI provided) [ 27 , 28 ], the results were considered as supportive information for the study and as an index of relative abundance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experimental and control squares were surveyed by walking along all roads in each sample unit (circuitous path), where we counted all visible pigeons (quadrate counts) . Because a part of the population can be hidden and remain undetected, bird detection probability must be considered . In previous work we derived a correction factor of 3.5 to account for detectability of pigeons based on a double sampling procedure using visual surveys and capture–recapture approaches .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, these methods estimate pigeon population in a city as a whole and used controversial indexes (Giunchi, Vanni, Soldatini, Albores-Barajas & Baldaccini, 2014).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%