Who are we sampling? Apparent survival differs between methods in a secretive species

Oikos

Volumn 117, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 1816-1823

  Vögeli, Matthias ^a   Laiolo, Paola ^a,b   Serrano, David ^a   Tella, José L ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION BIOLOGY   (Spain)

^b CSIC   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DATA SET; DEMOGRAPHIC TREND; DISPERSAL; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; MARK-RECAPTURE METHOD; PASSERINE; SAMPLING; SECRETION; SURVIVAL; WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT;

AVES; CHERSOPHILUS DUPONTI; PASSERIFORMES; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 54049137075     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.17225.x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Amrhein, V. et al. 2002. Nocturnal and diurnal singing activity in the nightingale: correlations with mating status and breeding cycle Anim. Behav. 64 : 939 944.
2. Anderson, D. R. et al. 1994. AIC model selection in overdispersed capture-recapture data Ecology 75 : 1780 1793.
3. Aragüés, A. 1992. Estudio de la alondra de Dupont (Chersophilus duponti) en la region aragonesa PhD thesis. - Zaragoza Univ., Spain.
4. Bibby, C. J. et al. 2000. Bird census techniques, 2nd ed. Academic Press.
5. BirdLife International. 2005. Chersophilus duponti. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species . Downloaded on 17 October 2007.
6. Burnham, K. P. Anderson, D. R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference. A practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd ed. Springer.
7. Ceugniet, M. Izumi, A. 2004. Individual vocal differences of the coo call in Japanese monkeys C. R. Biol. 327 : 149 157.
8. Choquet, R. et al. 2005. U-CARE 2.2 User's Manual. CEFE, UMR 5175, CNRS, Montpellier, France.
9. Cooch, E. White, G. 2004. MARK - a gentle introduction http://www.phidot.org/software /mark/docs/book/.Downloaded on 3 July 2007.
10. Cramp, S. 1988. The birds of the Western Palearctic 5. Oxford Univ. Press.
11. Crespin, L. et al. 2008. Is heterogeneity of catchability in capture-recapture studies a mere sampling artefact or a biologically relevant feature of the population? Popul. Ecol. 50 : 247 256.
12. Donald, P. F. 2007. Adult sex ratios in wild bird populations Ibis 149 : 671 692.
13. Faaborg, J. Arendt, W. J. 1995. Survival of Puerto Rican birds: are islands really that different? Auk 112 : 503 507.
14. Galeotti, P. Pavan, G. 1991. Individual recognition of male tawny owls (Strix aluco) using spectrograms of their territorial calls Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 3 : 113 126.
15. Garza, V. et al. 2004. Alondra de Dupont Chersophilus duponti Madroño, A. Libro Rojo de las aves de España. Dirección General de Conservación de la Naturaleza-SEO/Birdlife. Madrid 309 312.
16. Garza, V. et al. 2005. Home range, territoriality and habitat selection by the Dupont's lark Chersophilus duponti during the breeding and postbreeding periods Ardeola 52 : 133 146.
17. Gilbert, G. et al. 1994. Vocal individuality as a census tool: practical considerations illustrated by a study of two rare species J. Field Ornithol. 65 : 335 348.
18. Gilbert, G. et al. 2002. Local annual survival of booming male great bittern Botaurus stellaris in Britain, in the period 1990-1999 Ibis 144 : 51 61.
19. Hines, J. E. Sauer, J. R. 1989. Program CONTRAST - a general program for the analysis of several survival or recovery rate estimates. US Fish Wildlife Service, Fish Wildlife Tech. Rep. No. 24.
20. Karanth, U. K. et al. 2006. Assessing tiger populations dynamics using photographic capture-recapture sampling Ecology 87 : 2925 2937.
21. Laiolo, P. Tella, J. L. 2005. Habitat fragmentation affects culture transmission: patterns of song matching in Dupont's lark J. Appl. Ecol. 42 : 1183 1193.
22. Laiolo, P. Tella, J. L. 2006. Landscape bioacoustics: combining landscape ecology and call variability to detect the effects of habitat fragmentation on population structure Ecology 87 : 1203 1214.
23. Laiolo, P. et al. 2005. Two new calls from the Dupont's lark Chersophilus duponti and imitations by other alaudids: ecological and monitoring implications Ardeola 52 : 167 172.
24. Laiolo, P. et al. 2007. Testing acoustic versus physical marking: two complementary methods for individual-based monitoring of elusive species J. Avian Biol. 38 : 672 681.
25. Lebreton, J. D. et al. 1992. Modelling survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals: a unified approach with case studies Ecol. Monogr. 62 : 67 118.
26. Legare, M. L. et al. 1999. The effectiveness of tape playback in estimating black rail density J. Wildlife Manage. 63 : 116 125.
27. Lukacs, P. M. Burnham, K. P. 2005. Review of capture-recapture methods applicable to non-invasive genetic sampling Mol. Ecol. 14 : 3909 3919.
28. McGregor, P. K. Peake, T. M. 1998. The role of individual identification in conservation biology Caro, T. M. Behavioural ecology and conservation biology. Oxford Univ. Press 31 55.
29. Meekan, M. G. et al. 2006. Population size and structure of whale sharks Thincodon typus at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 319 : 275 285.
30. Mitani, J. C. Brandt, K. L. 1994. Social factors influence the acoustic variability in the long-distance calls of male chimpanzees Ethology 96 : 233 252.
31. Nowicki, S. et al. 2002. Individual variation in response to simulated territorial challenge among territory-holding song sparrows J. Avian Biol. 33 : 253 259.
32. Perret, N. et al. 2003. Transience, dispersal and survival rates in newt patchy populations J. Anim. Ecol. 72 : 567 575.
33. Pradel, R. et al. 1997. Capture-recapture survival models taking account of transients Biometrics 53 : 60 72.
34. Sæther, B. E. Bakke, O. 2000. Avian life history variation and contribution of demographic traits to the population growth rate Ecology 81 : 642 653.
35. Sæther, B. E. et al. 2005. Time to extinction of bird populations Ecology 86 : 693 700.
36. Salewski, V. et al. 2007. Stopover of migrating birds: simultaneous analysis of different marking methods enhances the power of capture-recapture analyses J. Ornithol. 148 : 29 37.
37. Sandercock, B. K. et al. 2000. Survival rates of a Neotropical parrot: implications for latitudinal comparisons of avian demography Ecology 81 : 1351 1370.
38. Seoane, J. et al. 2006. Habitat-suitability modelling to assess the effects of land-use changes on Dupont's lark Chersophilus duponti: a case study in the layna important bird Area Biol. Conserv. 128 : 241 252.
39. Serrano, D. Tella, J. L. 2007. The role of despotism and heritability in determining settlement patterns in the colonial lesser kestrel Am. Nat. 169 : E53 E67.
40. Serrano, D. et al. 2001. Factors affecting breeding dispersal in the facultatively colonial lesser kestrel: individual experience vs conspecific cues J. Anim. Ecol. 70 : 568 578.
41. Sillett, T. S. Holmes, R. T. 2002. Variation in survivorship of a migratory songbird throughout its annual cycle J. Anim. Ecol. 71 : 296 308.
42. Smith, J. N. M. Arcese, P. 1989. How fit are floaters? Consequences of alternative territorial behaviors in a nonmigratory sparrow Am. Nat. 133 : 830 845.
43. Svensson, L. 1992. Identification guide to European passerines, 4th ed. Stockholm.
44. Tella, J. L. et al. 2005. Current status of the threatened Dupont's lark Chersophilus duponti in Spain: overestimation, decline, and extinction of local populations Oryx 39 : 90 94.
45. Terry, A. M. R. et al. 2005. The role of vocal individuality in conservation Front. Zool. 2 : 1 16.
46. Thompson, W. L. 2004. Sampling rare or elusive species: concepts, designs and techniques for estimating population parameters. Island Press.
47. Vögeli, M. et al. 2007. Sex determination of Dupont's lark using molecular sexing and discriminant functions Ardeola 54 : 69 79.
48. White, G. C. Burnham, K. P. 1999. Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals Bird Study 46 : 120 139.
49. Yanes, M. Suárez, F. 1996. Incidental nest predation and lark conservation in an Iberian semiarid shrubsteppe Conserv. Biol. 10 : 881 887.
50. Zimmerman, G. S. et al. 2007. Finite study areas and vital rates: estimates of spotted owl survival and populations trends J. Appl. Ecol. 44 : 963 971.