2015
DOI: 10.1111/2041-210x.12506
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Research design considerations to ensure detection of all species in an avian community

Abstract: 1. Recent advances in the estimation of species richness from count data have allowed avian ecologists to incorporate incomplete detectability of species when comparing richness across space or time. Raw counts from single or repeated visits to sample point(s) are nonetheless still used for assessing community composition, and the failure to account for detectability when making these evaluations may lead to incorrect inferences about the community. 2. We estimated detection probabilities (P) for a suite of bi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
27
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
3
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Package “unmarked” in Program R was used to model community occupancy across multiple seasons with the function “colext” (Fiske & Chandler ). Most avian surveys have imperfect detection (Sliwinski et al ), and we were interested in estimating the fraction of the regional species pool that was present in each management treatment (Ch. 9, MacKenzie et al ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Package “unmarked” in Program R was used to model community occupancy across multiple seasons with the function “colext” (Fiske & Chandler ). Most avian surveys have imperfect detection (Sliwinski et al ), and we were interested in estimating the fraction of the regional species pool that was present in each management treatment (Ch. 9, MacKenzie et al ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Field visits were not conducted in adverse weather conditions, e.g. snow or heavy rain (Sliwinski et al 2016).…”
Section: Data Collectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From February to May 2014 we conducted surveys at 8 points (one point at each distance from the edge) twice per month, and from June to August 2014 we surveyed 16 points (two points at each distance) once per month. During 2015 from March to August we conducted monthly surveys at 24 points (three points at each distance) and to increase the number of surveys in July and August 2015 we repeated the surveys (a day after completing the initial 24 points) on eight of these points (one point at each distance), with the aim of accounting for every species present in our study area regardless of its detectability (Sliwinski et al 2016). The detections were recorded as either seen or heard or both.…”
Section: Bird Surveysmentioning
confidence: 99%