2017
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-18343-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimising monitoring efforts for secretive snakes: a comparison of occupancy and N-mixture models for assessment of population status

Abstract: A fifth of reptiles are Data Deficient; many due to unknown population status. Monitoring snake populations can be demanding due to crypsis and low population densities, with insufficient recaptures for abundance estimation via Capture-Mark-Recapture. Alternatively, binomial N-mixture models enable abundance estimation from count data without individual identification, but have rarely been successfully applied to snake populations. We evaluated the suitability of occupancy and N-mixture methods for monitoring … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
1
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
(118 reference statements)
0
31
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Nest locations of this sub‐Saharan migrant are difficult to identify due to their cryptic camouflage (Troscianko et al., 2016), crepuscular behaviour and low nesting densities across large areas (Cross et al., 2005; Holyoak, 2001). As such, crypsis can mean lower confidence in population estimates and uncertainty in the regional presence or absence of breeding individuals (Couturier et al., 2013; Ward et al., 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nest locations of this sub‐Saharan migrant are difficult to identify due to their cryptic camouflage (Troscianko et al., 2016), crepuscular behaviour and low nesting densities across large areas (Cross et al., 2005; Holyoak, 2001). As such, crypsis can mean lower confidence in population estimates and uncertainty in the regional presence or absence of breeding individuals (Couturier et al., 2013; Ward et al., 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More generally, snakes are secretive organisms notoriously difficult to study in the field. Demographic changes are not easily accessible to evaluation [55,56]. Strong decreases may escape observation and their possible causes might remain unnoticed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This variation in detectability between individuals and for the same individual over time prevents the use of more complex statistical models which use repeat visits to disentangle detectability and abundance assuming constant detectability and closed populations (e.g. N-mixture models; Royle, 2004;Ward et al, 2017;Barker et al, 2018). The peak count therefore remains the most robust index of population size available under these conditions with the available data.…”
Section: Population Trendsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have assumed that changes in the number of adders recorded at a given site reflect genuine changes in population size and are not influenced by systematic changes in their detectability over time. Our analysis accounts for variation in survey effort, which strongly influences snake detectability (Ward et al, 2017), but other factors may also influence detectability. Detectability may increase over time if surveyors become more familiar with a site.…”
Section: Caveats and Assumptionsmentioning
confidence: 99%