On the importance of estimating detection probabilities from at-sea surveys of flying seabirds

Journal of Avian Biology

Volumn 40, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 584-590

  Barbraud, Christophe ^a   Thiebot, Jean Baptiste ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BODY SIZE; LINE TRANSECT; MOVEMENT; POPULATION DENSITY; PROBABILITY; SEABIRD;

AVES;

EID: 72249099649     PISSN: 09088857     EISSN: 1600048X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-048X.2009.04653.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Becker, B. H., Beissinger, S. R. Carter, H. R. 1997. At-sea density monitoring of marbled murrelets in central California: methodological considerations Condor 99 : 743 755.
2. Borberg, J. M., Balance, L. T., Pitman, R. L. Ainley, D. G. 2005. A test for bias attributable to seabird avoidance of ships during surveys conducted in the tropical Pacific Mar. Ornithol. 33 : 173 179.
3. Briggs, K. T., Tyler, W. B. Lewis, D. B. 1985. Comparison of ship and aerial surveys of birds at sea J. Wildl. Manage. 49 : 405 411.
4. Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L. Thomas, L. 2001. Introduction to distance sampling. Oxford Univ. Press.
5. Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L. Thomas, L. 2004. Advanced distance sampling. Oxford Univ. Press.
6. Burnham, K. P. Anderson, D. R. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer-Verlag, New York.
7. Clarke, E. D., Spear, L. B., McCracken, M. L., Marques, F. F. C., Borchers, D. L., Buckland, S. T. Ainley, D. G. 2003. Validating the use of generalized additive models and at-sea surveys to estimate size and temporal trends of seabird populations J. Appl. Ecol. 40 : 278 292.
8. Diefenbach, D. R., Brauning, D. W. Mattice, J. A. 2003. Variability in grassland bird counts related to observer differences and species detection rates Auk 120 : 1168 1179.
9. Dixon, T. J. 1977. The distance at which sitting birds can be seen at sea Ibis 119 : 372 375.
10. Gaston, A. J. Smith, G. E. J. 1984. The interpretation of aerial surveys for seabirds: some effects of behaviour. Can. wildlife service, Ottawa.
11. Gordon, J. 2001. Measuring the range of animals at sea from boats using photographic and video images J. Appl. Ecol. 38 : 879 887.
12. Granholm, S. L. 1983. Bias in density estimates due to movements of birds Condor 85 : 243 248.
13. Heinemann, D. 1981. A range finder for pelagic bird censusing J. Wildl. Manage. 45 : 489 493.
14. Kissling, M. L., Reid, M., Lukacs, P. M., Gende, S. M. Lewis, S. B. 2007. Understanding abundance patterns of a declining seabird: implications for monitoring Ecol. Appl. 17 : 2164 2174.
15. Laake, J. L. Borchers, D. L. 2004. Methods for incomplete detection at distance zero Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L. Thomas, L. Advanced distance sampling. Oxford Univ. Press 108 189.
16. Mack, D. E., Raphael, M. G. Laake, J. L. 2002. Probability of detecting marbled murrelets at sea: effects of single versus paired observers J. Wildl. Manage. 66 : 865 873.
17. Nichols, J. D., Hines, J. E., Sauer, J. R., Fallon, F. W., Fallon, J. E. Heglund, P. J. 2000. A double-observer approach for estimating detection probability and abundance from point counts Auk 117 : 393 408.
18. Pennycuick, C. J. 1989. Bird flight performance: a practical calculation manual. Oxford Univ. Press.
19. Spear, L., Nur, N. Ainley, D. G. 1992. Estimating absolute densities of flying seabirds using analyses of relative movements Auk 109 : 385 389.
20. Spear, L. B., Ainley, D. G., Denise Hardesty, B., Howell, S. N. G. Webb, S. W. 2004. Reducing biases affecting at-sea surveys of seabirds: use of multiple observer teams Mar. Ornithol. 32 : 147 157.
21. Strong, C. S., Keitt, R. S., Mciver, W. R., Palmer, C. J. Gaffney, I. 1995. Distribution and population estimates of marbled murrelets at sea in Oregon during the summers of 1992 and 1993 Ralph, C. J., Hunt, G. L., Raphael, M. J. Piatt, J. F. Ecology and conservation of the marbled murrelet. Pacific Southwest Research Station 339 352.
22. Tasker, M. L., Hope-jones, P., Dixon, T. Blake, B. F. 1984. Counting seabirds at sea from ships: a review of methods employed and a suggestion for a standardized approach Auk 101 : 567 577.
23. Thomas, L., Laake, J. L., Strindberg, S., Marques, F. F. C., Buckland, S. T., Borchers, D. L., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Hedley, S. L., Pollard, J. H., Bishop, J. R. B. Marques, T. A. 2005. Distance 5.0. - research unit for wildlife population assessment. Univ. of St. Andrews, UK http://www.ruwpa.st- and.ac.uk/distance/.
24. Thompson, W. L. 2002. Towards reliable bird surveys: accounting for individuals present but not detected Auk 119 : 18 25
25. Trenkel, V. M. 2003. Density estimator for strip transects when animals show directional movement and observation speed is slow Comput. Stat. Dat. Anal. 44 : 305 312.
26. van der Meer, J. Camphuysen, C. J. 1996. Effect of observer differences on abundance estimates of seabirds from ship-board strip transect surveys Ibis 138 : 433 437.
27. van Franeker, J. A. 1994. A comparison of methods for counting seabirds at sea in the southern ocean J. Field Ornithol. 65 : 96 108.
28. Watson, R. A., Carlos, G. M. Samoilys, M. A. 1995. Bias introduced by the non-random movement of fish in visual transect surveys Ecol. Mod. 77 : 205 214.
29. Williams, B. K., Nichols, J. D. Conroy, M. J. 2002. Analysis and management of animal populations. Acad. Press, San Diego.