A common challenge for studying wildlife populations occurs when different survey methods provide inconsistent or incomplete inference on the trend, dynamics, or viability of a population. A potential solution to the challenge of conflicting or piecemeal data relies on the integration of multiple data types into a unified modeling framework, such as integrated population models (IPMs). IPMs are a powerful approach for species that inhabit spatially and seasonally complex environments. We provide guidance on exploiting the capabilities of IPMs to address inferential discrepancies that stem from spatiotemporal data mismatches. We illustrate this issue with analysis of a migratory species, the American Woodcock (Scolopax minor), in which individual monitoring programs suggest differing population trends. To address this discrepancy, we synthesized several long‐term data sets (1963–2015) within an IPM to estimate continental‐scale population trends, and link dynamic drivers across the full annual cycle and complete extent of the woodcock's geographic range in eastern North America. Our analysis reveals the limiting portions of the life cycle by identifying time periods and regions where vital rates are lowest and most variable, as well as which demographic parameters constitute the main drivers of population change. We conclude by providing recommendations for resolving conflicting population estimates within an integrated modeling approach, and discuss how strategies (e.g., data thinning, expert opinion elicitation) from other disciplines could be incorporated into ecological analyses when attempting to combine multiple, incongruent data types.
Accurate estimates of animal abundance are essential for guiding effective management, and poor survey data can produce misleading inferences. Aerial surveys are an efficient survey platform, capable of collecting wildlife data across large spatial extents in short timeframes. However, these surveys can yield unreliable data if not carefully executed. Despite a long history of aerial survey use in ecological research, problems common to aerial surveys have not yet been adequately resolved. Through an extensive review of the aerial survey literature over the last 50 years, we evaluated how common problems encountered in the data (including nondetection, counting error, and species misidentification) can manifest, the potential difficulties conferred, and the history of how these challenges have been addressed. Additionally, we used a double‐observer case study focused on waterbird data collected via aerial surveys and an online group (flock) counting quiz to explore the potential extent of each challenge and possible resolutions. We found that nearly three quarters of the aerial survey methodology literature focused on accounting for nondetection errors, while issues of counting error and misidentification were less commonly addressed. Through our case study, we demonstrated how these challenges can prove problematic by detailing the extent and magnitude of potential errors. Using our online quiz, we showed that aerial observers typically undercount group size and that the magnitude of counting errors increases with group size. Our results illustrate how each issue can act to bias inferences, highlighting the importance of considering individual methods for mitigating potential problems separately during survey design and analysis. We synthesized the information gained from our analyses to evaluate strategies for overcoming the challenges of using aerial survey data to estimate wildlife abundance, such as digital data collection methods, pooling species records by family, and ordinal modeling using binned data. Recognizing conditions that can lead to data collection errors and having reasonable solutions for addressing errors can allow researchers to allocate resources effectively to mitigate the most significant challenges for obtaining reliable aerial survey data.
Hotspot analysis is a commonly used method in ecology and conservation to identify areas of high biodiversity or conservation concern. However, delineating and mapping hotspots is subjective and various approaches can lead to different conclusions with regard to the classification of particular areas as hotspots, complicating long‐term conservation planning. We present a comparative analysis of recent approaches for identifying waterbird hotspots, with the goal of developing insights about the appropriate use of these methods. We selected four commonly used measures to identify persistent areas of high use: kernel density estimation, Getis‐Ord Gi*, hotspot persistence and hotspots conditional on presence, which represent the range of quantitative hotspot estimation approaches used in waterbird analyses. We applied each of the methods to aerial survey waterbird count data collected in the Great Lakes from 2012–2014. For each approach, we identified areas of high use for seven species/species groups and then compared the results across all methods and to mean effort‐corrected counts. Our results indicate that formal hotspot analysis frameworks do not always lead to the same conclusions. The kernel density and Getis‐Ord Gi* methods yielded the most similar results across all species analysed and were generally correlated with mean effort‐corrected count data. We found that these two models can differ substantially from the hotspot persistence and hotspots conditional on presence estimation approaches, which were not consistently similar to one another. The hotspot persistence approach differed most significantly from the other methods but is the only method to explicitly account for temporal variation. We recommend considering the ecological question and scale of conservation or management activities prior to designing survey methodologies. Deciding the appropriate definition and scale for analysis is critical for interpretation of hotspot analysis results as is inclusion of important covariates. Combining hotspot analysis methods using an integrative approach, either within a single analysis or post hoc, could lead to greater consistency in the identification of waterbird hotspots.
a b s t r a c t Keywords:Marine spatial planning Model selection Power analysis Seabirds Sampling design Wind energy development Estimating patterns of habitat use is challenging for marine avian species because seabirds tend to aggregate in large groups and it can be difficult to locate both individuals and groups in vast marine environments. We developed an approach to estimate the statistical power of discrete survey events to identify species-specific hotspots and coldspots of long-term seabird abundance in marine environments. We illustrate our approach using historical seabird data from survey transects in the U.S. Atlantic Ocean Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), an area that has been divided into "lease blocks" for proposed offshore wind energy development. For our power analysis, we examined whether discrete lease blocks within the region could be defined as hotspots (3× mean abundance in the OCS) or coldspots (1/3×) for individual species within a given season. For each of 74 species/season combinations, we determined which of eight candidate statistical distributions (ranging in their degree of skewedness) best fit the count data. We then used the selected distribution and estimates of regional prevalence to calculate and map statistical power to detect hotspots and coldspots, and estimate the p-value from Monte Carlo significance tests that specific lease blocks are in fact hotspots or coldspots relative to regional average abundance. The power to detect species-specific hotspots was higher than that of coldspots for most species because species-specific prevalence was relatively low (mean: 0.111; SD: 0.110). The number of surveys required for adequate power (N 0.6) was large for most species (tens to hundreds) using this hotspot definition. Regulators may need to accept higher proportional effect sizes, combine species into groups, and/or broaden the spatial scale by combining lease blocks in order to determine optimal placement of wind farms. Our power analysis approach provides a general framework for both retrospective analyses and future avian survey design and is applicable to a broad range of research and conservation problems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.