2003
DOI: 10.1670/0022-1511(2003)037[0245:mptoef]2.0.co;2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monitoring Population Trends of Eleutherodactylus Frogs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
21
0
6

Year Published

2007
2007
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
21
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Estimation of population size via CMR method is the most precise way to monitor population trend over time [31] but it is only suitable when the density of the population is high enough to ensure a sufficient recapture rate in a reasonable number of encounter events. In this study, only two species among eight were encountered frequently enough for using CMR models and only in habitats of high density despite a high number of encounter occasions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Estimation of population size via CMR method is the most precise way to monitor population trend over time [31] but it is only suitable when the density of the population is high enough to ensure a sufficient recapture rate in a reasonable number of encounter events. In this study, only two species among eight were encountered frequently enough for using CMR models and only in habitats of high density despite a high number of encounter occasions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This technique gives a good estimate of population size for territorial frogs (Driscoll 1998). Capture-mark-recapture techniques might allow to obtain better estimates of densities for species living on the ground (Funk et al 2003), but the capture of individuals on trees is generally impossible, and it is therefore diYcult to apply capture-recapture to arboreal species. Transect surveys were performed after dusk, between 16.45 and 20.45, when calling activity is high (Savage 2002).…”
Section: Sampling Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several reptile studies that have previously compared distance sampling with capture–recapture or removal plots also showed an underestimation using the distance sampling method. They all suggested that imperfect centerline detection was the most likely reason for this bias (Funk et al 2003, Leuteritz et al 2005, Grant and Doherty 2007, Smolensky and Fitzgerald 2010). However, other reptile studies have obtained comparable estimates using distance sampling and capture–recapture methods (Cassey and Ussher 1999, Swann et al 2002, Kacoliris et al 2009) probably because the g0 correction they used was sufficient to correct the bias (Swann et al 2002) or because the hypothesis of g0 = 1 was respected (Cassey and Ussher 1999, Kacoliris et al 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%