美国乔治亚州大规模地鼠龟调查中距离抽样方法的评价

L. Smith, J. Linehan, J. Stober, Matt J. Elliott, J. Jensen
{"title":"美国乔治亚州大规模地鼠龟调查中距离抽样方法的评价","authors":"L. Smith, J. Linehan, J. Stober, Matt J. Elliott, J. Jensen","doi":"10.1163/157075309X12470350858550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Gopher tortoise, Gopherus polyphemus , populations are threatened by habitat loss across their range. Management and conservation of the species has been hindered by the lack of population monitoring data. Recent studies have demonstrated that line transect distance sampling (LTDS) is efficient for estimating population parameters for gopher tortoises, yet this method has not gained wide-spread acceptance. We attempted to use LTDS to survey gopher tortoise populations on 20 protected areas across southern Georgia, USA in 2007 and 2008. We used a camera system to determine burrow occupancy at each site. The survey data were used to compare population estimates derived using LTDS (with burrow scoping) to estimates obtained with survey methods recommended in the 2007 Florida Gopher Tortoise Management Plan: area-constrained surveys of 15% of suitable habitat and a standard 50% burrow occupancy. LTDS estimates of tortoise population density ranged from 0.21 ± 0.04 tortoises/ha at Ohoopee Dunes Natural Area to 1.65 ± 0.37 tortoises/ha at General Coffee State Park. Distance sampling was generally very efficient (on average our survey rate was 0.88 km/h) and we obtained estimates of population size and density at 13 of the 20 sites. The method was much less efficient at sites with extremely low tortoise densities, and at sites where the survey area was poorly defined. Under the former circumstance, LTDS sampling would have required 88-1318 km of transect per site, which was beyond the scope of our overall project. In the latter circumstance additional ground-truthing of the habitat would have been necessary. Hence, we reported only the tortoise encounter rate and burrow occupancy estimates for these sites. Population estimates obtained with area-constrained surveys and a 50% burrow occupancy rate differed by as much as 114% from those obtained with LTDS and occupancy estimates based on burrow scoping.","PeriodicalId":55499,"journal":{"name":"Applied Herpetology","volume":"6 1","pages":"355-368"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/157075309X12470350858550","citationCount":"30","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An evaluation of distance sampling for large-scale gopher tortoise surveys in Georgia, USA\",\"authors\":\"L. Smith, J. Linehan, J. Stober, Matt J. Elliott, J. Jensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/157075309X12470350858550\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Gopher tortoise, Gopherus polyphemus , populations are threatened by habitat loss across their range. Management and conservation of the species has been hindered by the lack of population monitoring data. Recent studies have demonstrated that line transect distance sampling (LTDS) is efficient for estimating population parameters for gopher tortoises, yet this method has not gained wide-spread acceptance. We attempted to use LTDS to survey gopher tortoise populations on 20 protected areas across southern Georgia, USA in 2007 and 2008. We used a camera system to determine burrow occupancy at each site. The survey data were used to compare population estimates derived using LTDS (with burrow scoping) to estimates obtained with survey methods recommended in the 2007 Florida Gopher Tortoise Management Plan: area-constrained surveys of 15% of suitable habitat and a standard 50% burrow occupancy. LTDS estimates of tortoise population density ranged from 0.21 ± 0.04 tortoises/ha at Ohoopee Dunes Natural Area to 1.65 ± 0.37 tortoises/ha at General Coffee State Park. Distance sampling was generally very efficient (on average our survey rate was 0.88 km/h) and we obtained estimates of population size and density at 13 of the 20 sites. The method was much less efficient at sites with extremely low tortoise densities, and at sites where the survey area was poorly defined. Under the former circumstance, LTDS sampling would have required 88-1318 km of transect per site, which was beyond the scope of our overall project. In the latter circumstance additional ground-truthing of the habitat would have been necessary. Hence, we reported only the tortoise encounter rate and burrow occupancy estimates for these sites. Population estimates obtained with area-constrained surveys and a 50% burrow occupancy rate differed by as much as 114% from those obtained with LTDS and occupancy estimates based on burrow scoping.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55499,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Herpetology\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"355-368\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/157075309X12470350858550\",\"citationCount\":\"30\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Herpetology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/157075309X12470350858550\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Herpetology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/157075309X12470350858550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30

摘要

地鼠龟(Gopherus polyphemus)的种群受到栖息地丧失的威胁。由于缺乏种群监测数据,该物种的管理和保护受到了阻碍。近年来的研究表明,样线距离抽样(LTDS)是估算地鼠象种群参数的有效方法,但这种方法尚未得到广泛接受。2007年和2008年,我们尝试使用LTDS对美国佐治亚州南部20个保护区的地鼠龟种群进行调查。我们使用了一个摄像系统来确定每个地点的洞穴占用情况。调查数据用于比较使用LTDS(带洞穴范围)得出的种群估计值与2007年佛罗里达地鼠龟管理计划中推荐的调查方法得出的估计值:面积限制调查15%的合适栖息地和标准50%的洞穴占用率。LTDS估计的陆龟种群密度范围从Ohoopee Dunes自然区域的0.21±0.04只/ha到General Coffee州立公园的1.65±0.37只/ha。距离抽样通常非常有效(我们的平均调查速度为0.88公里/小时),我们获得了20个站点中13个站点的人口规模和密度估计值。在龟密度极低的地点和调查区域界定不清的地点,这种方法的效率要低得多。在前一种情况下,LTDS采样将需要每个站点88-1318 km的样条,这超出了我们整个项目的范围。在后一种情况下,有必要对栖息地进行额外的地面测量。因此,我们只报告了这些地点的乌龟遭遇率和洞穴占用估计。根据受面积限制的调查和50%的洞穴占用率获得的人口估计与使用LTDS和基于洞穴范围的占用率估计获得的人口估计相差多达114%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An evaluation of distance sampling for large-scale gopher tortoise surveys in Georgia, USA
Gopher tortoise, Gopherus polyphemus , populations are threatened by habitat loss across their range. Management and conservation of the species has been hindered by the lack of population monitoring data. Recent studies have demonstrated that line transect distance sampling (LTDS) is efficient for estimating population parameters for gopher tortoises, yet this method has not gained wide-spread acceptance. We attempted to use LTDS to survey gopher tortoise populations on 20 protected areas across southern Georgia, USA in 2007 and 2008. We used a camera system to determine burrow occupancy at each site. The survey data were used to compare population estimates derived using LTDS (with burrow scoping) to estimates obtained with survey methods recommended in the 2007 Florida Gopher Tortoise Management Plan: area-constrained surveys of 15% of suitable habitat and a standard 50% burrow occupancy. LTDS estimates of tortoise population density ranged from 0.21 ± 0.04 tortoises/ha at Ohoopee Dunes Natural Area to 1.65 ± 0.37 tortoises/ha at General Coffee State Park. Distance sampling was generally very efficient (on average our survey rate was 0.88 km/h) and we obtained estimates of population size and density at 13 of the 20 sites. The method was much less efficient at sites with extremely low tortoise densities, and at sites where the survey area was poorly defined. Under the former circumstance, LTDS sampling would have required 88-1318 km of transect per site, which was beyond the scope of our overall project. In the latter circumstance additional ground-truthing of the habitat would have been necessary. Hence, we reported only the tortoise encounter rate and burrow occupancy estimates for these sites. Population estimates obtained with area-constrained surveys and a 50% burrow occupancy rate differed by as much as 114% from those obtained with LTDS and occupancy estimates based on burrow scoping.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信