跟踪数据可替代重见数据推断种群范围

IF 3.4 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY Journal of Biogeography Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1111/jbi.14996
Hans Linssen, E. Emiel van Loon, Judy Z. Shamoun-Baranes, Lisa Vergin, Jutta Leyrer, Bart A. Nolet
{"title":"跟踪数据可替代重见数据推断种群范围","authors":"Hans Linssen,&nbsp;E. Emiel van Loon,&nbsp;Judy Z. Shamoun-Baranes,&nbsp;Lisa Vergin,&nbsp;Jutta Leyrer,&nbsp;Bart A. Nolet","doi":"10.1111/jbi.14996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Large-scale space use and geographical ranges of animal populations are central topics in ecology. Whereas they are traditionally often based on citizen science or professional sightings of (marked) animals, recent technological developments have presented GPS tracking as an alternative method for inferring space use at the population level. Tracking devices are however much more expensive than traditional marks, rings or collars, leading to datasets that typically consist of much fewer individuals. We study how GPS tracking data and citizen science resighting data of marked individuals compare as alternative sources for inferring range size.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Location</h3>\n \n <p>Northwestern Europe.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Taxon</h3>\n \n <p>Bewick's swan (<i>Cygnus columbianus bewickii</i>).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We calculated Bewick's swan range sizes from a wealth of GPS tracking and resighting data during winter, the period of the year when both data types are abundant. We examined the effect of the number of individuals and the total number of spatial records (either resightings or GPS fixes) on the inferred range size. Moreover, we combined GPS tracks with resightings of the same individuals to empirically determine spatial variation in resighting rates.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Tracked individuals generated records across an area 1.5–2 times larger than individuals that were merely resighted. Moreover, any given number of daily GPS records (rather than GPS-tracked individuals) yielded an area 1.5 times larger than that same number of resighting records. A small number of GPS-tracked individuals (~20) was sufficient to yield a larger range size compared to much higher numbers of resighted individuals (well over 400). Spatial variation in resighting rates corresponded well with the differences in range size from the two data types, indicating that spatial gaps in observer effort can hamper range estimations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>When combined with resighting data, tracking data can be used to indicate areas of low observer effort. Although citizen science resightings are essential for collecting various types of biological information, we show that GPS tracking presents a highly efficient alternative to traditional marking for assessing large-scale space use and population ranges, requiring far fewer individuals to be used.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15299,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biogeography","volume":"51 12","pages":"2356-2368"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbi.14996","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tracking data as an alternative to resighting data for inferring population ranges\",\"authors\":\"Hans Linssen,&nbsp;E. Emiel van Loon,&nbsp;Judy Z. Shamoun-Baranes,&nbsp;Lisa Vergin,&nbsp;Jutta Leyrer,&nbsp;Bart A. Nolet\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jbi.14996\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>Large-scale space use and geographical ranges of animal populations are central topics in ecology. Whereas they are traditionally often based on citizen science or professional sightings of (marked) animals, recent technological developments have presented GPS tracking as an alternative method for inferring space use at the population level. Tracking devices are however much more expensive than traditional marks, rings or collars, leading to datasets that typically consist of much fewer individuals. We study how GPS tracking data and citizen science resighting data of marked individuals compare as alternative sources for inferring range size.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Location</h3>\\n \\n <p>Northwestern Europe.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Taxon</h3>\\n \\n <p>Bewick's swan (<i>Cygnus columbianus bewickii</i>).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We calculated Bewick's swan range sizes from a wealth of GPS tracking and resighting data during winter, the period of the year when both data types are abundant. We examined the effect of the number of individuals and the total number of spatial records (either resightings or GPS fixes) on the inferred range size. Moreover, we combined GPS tracks with resightings of the same individuals to empirically determine spatial variation in resighting rates.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Tracked individuals generated records across an area 1.5–2 times larger than individuals that were merely resighted. Moreover, any given number of daily GPS records (rather than GPS-tracked individuals) yielded an area 1.5 times larger than that same number of resighting records. A small number of GPS-tracked individuals (~20) was sufficient to yield a larger range size compared to much higher numbers of resighted individuals (well over 400). Spatial variation in resighting rates corresponded well with the differences in range size from the two data types, indicating that spatial gaps in observer effort can hamper range estimations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>When combined with resighting data, tracking data can be used to indicate areas of low observer effort. Although citizen science resightings are essential for collecting various types of biological information, we show that GPS tracking presents a highly efficient alternative to traditional marking for assessing large-scale space use and population ranges, requiring far fewer individuals to be used.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15299,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Biogeography\",\"volume\":\"51 12\",\"pages\":\"2356-2368\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbi.14996\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Biogeography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbi.14996\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biogeography","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbi.14996","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 动物种群的大规模空间利用和地理范围是生态学的核心课题。传统上,它们通常基于公民科学或专业人员对(有标记的)动物的目击,而最近的技术发展则将全球定位系统跟踪作为推断种群空间利用的另一种方法。然而,与传统的标记、环或项圈相比,追踪设备要昂贵得多,导致数据集所包含的个体数量通常要少得多。我们研究了 GPS 跟踪数据与公民科学重新观察标记个体的数据作为推断活动范围大小的替代来源之间的比较。方法我们通过冬季大量的 GPS 跟踪数据和重新观察数据计算了布维克天鹅的活动范围大小,冬季是两种数据类型都很丰富的时期。我们研究了个体数量和空间记录(重见或 GPS 定位)总数对推断范围大小的影响。此外,我们还将 GPS 跟踪记录与同一个体的重见记录结合起来,以根据经验确定重见率的空间变化。此外,任何给定数量的每日 GPS 记录(而不是 GPS 跟踪的个体)所产生的区域都比相同数量的重见记录大 1.5 倍。与数量更多的重见个体(远远超过 400 个)相比,少量的 GPS 跟踪个体(约 20 个)就足以产生更大的范围。重见率的空间差异与两种数据类型的活动范围大小差异非常吻合,这表明观察者工作的空间差距可能会阻碍活动范围的估计。尽管公民科学重见对于收集各类生物信息至关重要,但我们发现,在评估大规模空间利用和种群范围时,GPS 跟踪是传统标记的一种高效替代方法,所需的个体数量要少得多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Tracking data as an alternative to resighting data for inferring population ranges

Aim

Large-scale space use and geographical ranges of animal populations are central topics in ecology. Whereas they are traditionally often based on citizen science or professional sightings of (marked) animals, recent technological developments have presented GPS tracking as an alternative method for inferring space use at the population level. Tracking devices are however much more expensive than traditional marks, rings or collars, leading to datasets that typically consist of much fewer individuals. We study how GPS tracking data and citizen science resighting data of marked individuals compare as alternative sources for inferring range size.

Location

Northwestern Europe.

Taxon

Bewick's swan (Cygnus columbianus bewickii).

Methods

We calculated Bewick's swan range sizes from a wealth of GPS tracking and resighting data during winter, the period of the year when both data types are abundant. We examined the effect of the number of individuals and the total number of spatial records (either resightings or GPS fixes) on the inferred range size. Moreover, we combined GPS tracks with resightings of the same individuals to empirically determine spatial variation in resighting rates.

Results

Tracked individuals generated records across an area 1.5–2 times larger than individuals that were merely resighted. Moreover, any given number of daily GPS records (rather than GPS-tracked individuals) yielded an area 1.5 times larger than that same number of resighting records. A small number of GPS-tracked individuals (~20) was sufficient to yield a larger range size compared to much higher numbers of resighted individuals (well over 400). Spatial variation in resighting rates corresponded well with the differences in range size from the two data types, indicating that spatial gaps in observer effort can hamper range estimations.

Main Conclusions

When combined with resighting data, tracking data can be used to indicate areas of low observer effort. Although citizen science resightings are essential for collecting various types of biological information, we show that GPS tracking presents a highly efficient alternative to traditional marking for assessing large-scale space use and population ranges, requiring far fewer individuals to be used.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Biogeography
Journal of Biogeography 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.10%
发文量
203
审稿时长
2.2 months
期刊介绍: Papers dealing with all aspects of spatial, ecological and historical biogeography are considered for publication in Journal of Biogeography. The mission of the journal is to contribute to the growth and societal relevance of the discipline of biogeography through its role in the dissemination of biogeographical research.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Cover Issue Information Cover Species Distribution Models for Mesopelagic Mesozooplankton Community
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1