Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T18:19:39.934Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Monitoring abundance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2009

Jonathan Bart
Affiliation:
United States Geological Survey, California
Michael A. Fligner
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
William I. Notz
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Monitoring abundance means estimating trends in abundance, usually through time though occasionally across space or with respect to some other variable. Estimating temporal trends in abundance of animal populations is a common objective in both applied and theoretical research. The most common design involves surveys in the same locations run once or more per year for several years. The data are often collected using ‘index methods’ in which the counts are not restricted to well-defined plots or if they are the animals present are not all detected and the fraction detected is not known. Results are usually summarized by calculating the mean number of animals detected per plot, route, or some other measure of effort, during each period. These means are then plotted against time (Fig. 8.1). When the counts come from complete surveys of well-defined plots, then the Y-axis is in density units. In the more common case of index data, the Y-axis shows the number recorded per survey route or some other measure of effort. We assume (or at least hope) that a 5% change in survey results indicates a 5% change in population size but we have no direct measure of absolute density.

The analysis of trend data raises several difficult issues. First, ‘the trend’ can be defined in different ways, and the choice among them may be difficult and subjective. Second, statistical difficulties arise in estimating precision because the same routes are surveyed each year so the annual means are not independent. Third, use of index methods, rather than complete counts on well-defined plots, means that change in survey efficiency may cause spurious trends in the data.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×