海鸟海上调查:线剖面法优于点剖面法

Q3 Agricultural and Biological Sciences Open Ornithology Journal Pub Date : 2017-05-16 DOI:10.2174/1874453201710010042
F. Bolduc, D. Fifield
{"title":"海鸟海上调查:线剖面法优于点剖面法","authors":"F. Bolduc, D. Fifield","doi":"10.2174/1874453201710010042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Methods: We tested whether modeling of detection probabilities, and density estimates with their coefficients of variation obtained from the point-transect method provided more robust and precise results than the more commonly used line-transect method. We subdivided our data by species groups (alcids, and aerialist species), and into two behavior categories (flying vs. swimming). We also computed density estimates from the strip-transect and point count methods, to relate differences between transect methods to their counterparts that do not consider a decreasing probability of detection with distance from the observer. We used data collected in the Gulf of St. Lawrence between 2009 and 2010 when observers simultaneously conducted lineand point-transect sampling.","PeriodicalId":39058,"journal":{"name":"Open Ornithology Journal","volume":"10 1","pages":"42-52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Seabirds At-Sea Surveys: The Line-Transect Method Outperforms the Point-Transect Alternative\",\"authors\":\"F. Bolduc, D. Fifield\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1874453201710010042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Methods: We tested whether modeling of detection probabilities, and density estimates with their coefficients of variation obtained from the point-transect method provided more robust and precise results than the more commonly used line-transect method. We subdivided our data by species groups (alcids, and aerialist species), and into two behavior categories (flying vs. swimming). We also computed density estimates from the strip-transect and point count methods, to relate differences between transect methods to their counterparts that do not consider a decreasing probability of detection with distance from the observer. We used data collected in the Gulf of St. Lawrence between 2009 and 2010 when observers simultaneously conducted lineand point-transect sampling.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39058,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Ornithology Journal\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"42-52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Ornithology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874453201710010042\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Ornithology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874453201710010042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

方法:我们测试了点样条法获得的检测概率和密度估计及其变异系数的建模是否比更常用的样条法提供了更稳健和精确的结果。我们将数据按物种组(alcids和空中飞人物种)细分,并分为两个行为类别(飞行和游泳)。我们还计算了条带样带和点计数方法的密度估计值,以将样带方法与不考虑检测概率随观察者距离的降低而降低的对应方法之间的差异联系起来。我们使用了2009年至2010年间在圣劳伦斯湾收集的数据,当时观测者同时进行了线性和点样带采样。
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
Seabirds At-Sea Surveys: The Line-Transect Method Outperforms the Point-Transect Alternative
Methods: We tested whether modeling of detection probabilities, and density estimates with their coefficients of variation obtained from the point-transect method provided more robust and precise results than the more commonly used line-transect method. We subdivided our data by species groups (alcids, and aerialist species), and into two behavior categories (flying vs. swimming). We also computed density estimates from the strip-transect and point count methods, to relate differences between transect methods to their counterparts that do not consider a decreasing probability of detection with distance from the observer. We used data collected in the Gulf of St. Lawrence between 2009 and 2010 when observers simultaneously conducted lineand point-transect sampling.
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
Open Ornithology Journal
Open Ornithology Journal Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Open Ornithology Journal is an Open Access online journal, which publishes research articles, reviews/mini-reviews, letters and guest edited single topic issues in all important areas of ornithology including avian behaviour,genetics, phylogeography , conservation, demography, ecology, evolution, and morphology. The Open Ornithology Journal, a peer-reviewed journal, is an important and reliable source of current information on developments in the field. The emphasis will be on publishing quality papers rapidly and making them freely available to researchers worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Description of New American Carduelis/Spinus Bird Species in La Paz (Bolivia): C./S. lapazensis. Glucose Concentrations in Closely Related Titmice (Baeolophus) Species Linked to Regional Habitat Differences Across an Avian Hybrid Zone Bird Diversity in Nensebo Moist Afromontane Forest Fragment, South Eastern Ethiopia. Influence of Disturbance on Avian Communities in Agricultural Conservation Buffers in Mississippi, USA Threats and Vision for the Conservation of Galápagos Birds
×
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