Fixed Site Sampling Versus Modified Fixed Site Sampling with a Random Sampling Component for Optimizing Early Detection Monitoring of Non-Native Fishes

IF 0.5 4区环境科学与生态学 Q4 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Northeastern Naturalist Pub Date : 2023-02-17 DOI:10.1656/045.030.0102

B. Harris, Andrya L Whitten, Bradley J. Smith, C. Hayer

{"title":"Fixed Site Sampling Versus Modified Fixed Site Sampling with a Random Sampling Component for Optimizing Early Detection Monitoring of Non-Native Fishes","authors":"B. Harris, Andrya L Whitten, Bradley J. Smith, C. Hayer","doi":"10.1656/045.030.0102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract - Standardized sampling of fishes is either probabilistic (i.e., random) or non-probabilistic (i.e., fixed), with each having advantages and disadvantages. Our study objective was to evaluate whether a fixed site-survey design for early detection monitoring of non-native fishes could be improved by modifying fixed site selection and adding random sampling. Results were largely similar but varied by evaluation metric; accumulation curves of species suggested that performance of the fixed survey design was 10% higher than the modified survey and also accumulated species significantly faster from 1 to 42 units of effort. Results indicated the fixed site survey previously took advantage of the patchiness in fish distribution, leaving little potential efficiency to gain using the modified survey design. We would like to emphasize that the modified survey design was effective, just not as effective as the fixed site survey, and could likely optimize early detection monitoring (EDM) for programs with less available fish data to draw observations from or if only random sampling was used for monitoring.","PeriodicalId":49742,"journal":{"name":"Northeastern Naturalist","volume":"30 1","pages":"9 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Northeastern Naturalist","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1656/045.030.0102","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract - Standardized sampling of fishes is either probabilistic (i.e., random) or non-probabilistic (i.e., fixed), with each having advantages and disadvantages. Our study objective was to evaluate whether a fixed site-survey design for early detection monitoring of non-native fishes could be improved by modifying fixed site selection and adding random sampling. Results were largely similar but varied by evaluation metric; accumulation curves of species suggested that performance of the fixed survey design was 10% higher than the modified survey and also accumulated species significantly faster from 1 to 42 units of effort. Results indicated the fixed site survey previously took advantage of the patchiness in fish distribution, leaving little potential efficiency to gain using the modified survey design. We would like to emphasize that the modified survey design was effective, just not as effective as the fixed site survey, and could likely optimize early detection monitoring (EDM) for programs with less available fish data to draw observations from or if only random sampling was used for monitoring.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

固定地点抽样与随机抽样改进固定地点抽样对非本地鱼类早期监测的优化

摘要:鱼类的标准化抽样要么是概率的(即随机的)，要么是非概率的(即固定的)，每一种都有优点和缺点。我们的研究目的是评估是否可以通过修改固定地点选择和增加随机抽样来改进用于非本地鱼类早期发现监测的固定地点调查设计。结果大致相似，但因评价指标而异;物种积累曲线表明，固定调查设计的性能比修改后的调查提高了10%，并且从1 ~ 42单位努力积累物种的速度也显著加快。结果表明，以前的固定地点调查利用了鱼类分布的斑块性，改进后的调查设计几乎没有潜在的效率。我们想强调的是，改进后的调查设计是有效的，只是不如固定地点调查有效，并且可能会优化早期检测监测(EDM)，用于可获得的鱼类数据较少或仅使用随机抽样进行监测的项目。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Northeastern Naturalist 环境科学-生态学

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

18-36 weeks

期刊介绍： The Northeastern Naturalist covers all aspects of the natural history sciences of terrestrial, freshwater, and marine organisms and the environments of the northeastern portion of North America, roughly bounded from Virginia to Missouri, north to Minnesota and Nunavut, east to Newfoundland, and south back to Virginia. Manuscripts based on field studies outside of this region that provide information on species within this region may be considered at the Editor’s discretion. The journal welcomes manuscripts based on observations and research focused on the biology of terrestrial, freshwater, and marine organisms and communities as it relates to their life histories and their function within, use of, and adaptation to the environment and the habitats in which they are found, as well as on the ecology and conservation of species and habitats. Such studies may encompass measurements, surveys, and/or experiments in the field, under lab conditions, or utilizing museum and herbarium specimens. Subject areas include, but are not limited to, anatomy, behavior, biogeography, biology, conservation, evolution, ecology, genetics, parasitology, physiology, population biology, and taxonomy. Strict lab, modeling, and simulation studies on natural history aspects of the region, without any field component, will be considered for publication as long as the research has direct and clear significance to field naturalists and the manuscript discusses these implications.