Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

T.R. Simons

Publications and source records attributed to T.R. Simons.

10 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2010

Experimental investigation of observation error in anuran call surveys

Occupancy models that account for imperfect detection are often used to monitor anuran and songbird species occurrence. However, presenceabsence data arising from auditory detections may be more prone to observation error (e.g., false-positive detections) than are sampling approaches utilizing physical captures or sightings of individuals. We conducted realistic, replicated field experiments using a remote broadcasting system to simulate simple anuran call surveys and to investigate potential factors affecting observation error in these studies. Distance, time, ambient noise, and observer abilities were the most important factors explaining false-negative detections. Distance and observer ability were the best overall predictors of false-positive errors, but ambient noise and competing species also affected error rates for some species. False-positive errors made up 5 of all positive detections, with individual observers exhibiting false-positive rates between 0.5 and 14. Previous research suggests false-positive errors of these magnitudes would induce substantial positive biases in standard estimators of species occurrence, and we recommend practices to mitigate for false positives when developing occupancy monitoring protocols that rely on auditory detections. These recommendations include additional observer training, limiting the number of target species, and establishing distance and ambient noise thresholds during surveys. ?? 2010 The Wildlife Society.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2007

Multiple-species analysis of point count data: A more parsimonious modelling framework

1. Although population surveys often provide information on multiple species, these data are rarely analysed within a multiple-species framework despite the potential for more efficient estimation of population parameters. 2. We have developed a multiple-species modelling framework that uses similarities in capture/detection processes among species to model multiple species data more parsimoniously. We present examples of this approach applied to distance, time of detection and multiple observer sampling for avian point count data. 3. Models that included species as a covariate and individual species effects were generally selected as the best models for distance sampling, but group models without species effects performed best for the time of detection and multiple observer methods. Population estimates were more precise for no-species-effect models than for species-effect models, demonstrating the benefits of exploiting species' similarities when modelling multiple species data. Partial species-effect models and additive models were also useful because they modelled similarities among species while allowing for species differences. 4. Synthesis and applications. We recommend the adoption of multiple-species modelling because of its potential for improved population estimates. This framework will be particularly beneficial for modelling count data from rare species because information on the detection process can be 'borrowed' from more common species. The multiple-species modelling framework presented here is applicable to a wide range of sampling techniques and taxa. ?? 2007 The Authors.

Journal of Applied Ecology↗
USGS2005

Statistical approaches to the analysis of point count data: A little extra information can go a long way

Point counts are a standard sampling procedure for many bird species, but lingering concerns still exist about the quality of information produced from the method. It is well known that variation in observer ability and environmental conditions can influence the detection probability of birds in point counts, but many biologists have been reluctant to abandon point counts in favor of more intensive approaches to counting. However, over the past few years a variety of statistical and methodological developments have begun to provide practical ways of overcoming some of the problems with point counts. We describe some of these approaches, and show how they can be integrated into standard point count protocols to greatly enhance the quality of the information. Several tools now exist for estimation of detection probability of birds during counts, including distance sampling, double observer methods, time-depletion (removal) methods, and hybrid methods that combine these approaches. Many counts are conducted in habitats that make auditory detection of birds much more likely than visual detection. As a framework for understanding detection probability during such counts, we propose separating two components of the probability a bird is detected during a count into (1) the probability a bird vocalizes during the count and (2) the probability this vocalization is detected by an observer. In addition, we propose that some measure of the area sampled during a count is necessary for valid inferences about bird populations. This can be done by employing fixed-radius counts or more sophisticated distance-sampling models. We recommend any studies employing point counts be designed to estimate detection probability and to include a measure of the area sampled.

Book chapter↗
USGS2004

Estimating site occupancy and species detection probability parameters for terrestrial salamanders

Recent, worldwide amphibian declines have highlighted a need for more extensive and rigorous monitoring programs to document species occurrence and detect population change. Abundance estimation methods, such as mark-recapture, are often expensive and impractical for large-scale or long-term amphibian monitoring. We apply a new method to estimate proportion of area occupied using detection/nondetection data from a terrestrial salamander system in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Estimated species-specific detection probabilities were all <1 and varied among seven species and four sampling methods. Time (i.e., sampling occasion) and four large-scale habitat characteristics (previous disturbance history, vegetation type, elevation, and stream presence) were important covariates in estimates of both proportion of area occupied and detection probability. All sampling methods were consistent in their ability to identify important covariates for each salamander species. We believe proportion of area occupied represents a useful state variable for large-scale monitoring programs. However, our results emphasize the importance of estimating detection and occupancy probabilities rather than using an unadjusted proportion of sites where species are observed where actual occupancy probabilities are confounded with detection probabilities. Estimated detection probabilities accommodate variations in sampling effort; thus comparisons of occupancy probabilities are possible among studies with different sampling protocols.

North Carolina, Tennessee↗
USGS2002

Large scale wildlife monitoring studies: Statistical methods for design and analysis

Techniques for estimation of absolute abundance of wildlife populations have received a lot of attention in recent years. The statistical research has been focused on intensive small-scale studies. Recently, however, wildlife biologists have desired to study populations of animals at very large scales for monitoring purposes. Population indices are widely used in these extensive monitoring programs because they are inexpensive compared to estimates of absolute abundance. A crucial underlying assumption is that the population index ( C ) is directly proportional to the population density ( D ). The proportionality constant, β , is simply the probability of 'detection' for animals in the survey. As spatial and temporal comparisons of indices are crucial, it is necessary to also assume that the probability of detection is constant over space and time. Biologists intuitively recognize this when they design rigid protocols for the studies where the indices are collected. Unfortunately, however in many field studios the assumption is clearly invalid. We believe that the estimation of detection probability should be built into the monitoring design through a double sampling approach. A large sample of points provides an abundance index, and a smaller sub-sample of the same points is used to estimate detection probability. There is an important need for statistical research on the design and analysis of these complex studies. Some basic concepts based on actual avian, amphibian, and fish monitoring studies are presented in this article.

Environmetrics↗
USGS2002

A removal model for estimating detection probabilities from point-count surveys

Use of point-count surveys is a popular method for collecting data on abundance and distribution of birds. However, analyses of such data often ignore potential differences in detection probability. We adapted a removal model to directly estimate detection probability during point-count surveys. The model assumes that singing frequency is a major factor influencing probability of detection when birds are surveyed using point counts. This may be appropriate for surveys in which most detections are by sound. The model requires counts to be divided into several time intervals. Point counts are often conducted for 10 min, where the number of birds recorded is divided into those first observed in the first 3 min, the subsequent 2 min, and the last 5 min. We developed a maximum-likelihood estimator for the detectability of birds recorded during counts divided into those intervals. This technique can easily be adapted to point counts divided into intervals of any length. We applied this method to unlimited-radius counts conducted in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. We used model selection criteria to identify whether detection probabilities varied among species, throughout the morning, throughout the season, and among different observers. We found differences in detection probability among species. Species that sing frequently such as Winter Wren ( Troglodytes troglodytes ) and Acadian Flycatcher ( Empidonax virescens ) had high detection probabilities (∼90%) and species that call infrequently such as Pileated Woodpecker ( Dryocopus pileatus ) had low detection probability (36%). We also found detection probabilities varied with the time of day for some species (e.g. thrushes) and between observers for other species. We used the same approach to estimate detection probability and density for a subset of the observations with limited-radius point counts.

The Auk↗
USGS2000

A removal model for estimating detection probabilities from point-count surveys

We adapted a removal model to estimate detection probability during point count surveys. The model assumes one factor influencing detection during point counts is the singing frequency of birds. This may be true for surveys recording forest songbirds when most detections are by sound. The model requires counts to be divided into several time intervals. We used time intervals of 2, 5, and 10 min to develop a maximum-likelihood estimator for the detectability of birds during such surveys. We applied this technique to data from bird surveys conducted in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. We used model selection criteria to identify whether detection probabilities varied among species, throughout the morning, throughout the season, and among different observers. The overall detection probability for all birds was 75%. We found differences in detection probability among species. Species that sing frequently such as Winter Wren and Acadian Flycatcher had high detection probabilities (about 90%) and species that call infrequently such as Pileated Woodpecker had low detection probability (36%). We also found detection probabilities varied with the time of day for some species (e.g. thrushes) and between observers for other species. This method of estimating detectability during point count surveys offers a promising new approach to using count data to address questions of the bird abundance, density, and population trends.

Book chapter↗