Statistical Methods & Applications

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 67–80 | Cite as

Accounting for animal density gradients using independent information in distance sampling surveys

  • Tiago A. Marques
  • Stephen T. Buckland
  • Regina Bispo
  • Brett Howland
Article

Abstract

Distance sampling is extensively used for estimating animal density or abundance. Conventional methods assume that location of line or point transects is random with respect to the animal population, yet transects are often placed along linear features such as roads, rivers or shorelines that do not randomly sample the study region, resulting in biased estimates of abundance. If it is possible to collect additional data that allow an animal density gradient with respect to the transects to be modelled, we show how to extend the conventional distance sampling likelihood to give asymptotically unbiased estimates of density for the covered area. We illustrate the proposed methods using data for a kangaroo population surveyed by line transects laid along tracks, for which the true density is known from an independent source, and the density gradient with respect to the tracks is estimated from a sample of GPS collared animals. For this example, density of animals increases with distance from the tracks, so that detection probability is overestimated and density underestimated if the non-random location of transects is ignored. When we account for the density gradient, there is no evidence of bias in the abundance estimate. We end with a list of practical recommendations to investigators conducting distance sampling surveys where density gradients could be an issue.

Keywords

Density gradients Distance sampling Kangaroo Road surveys Line and point transects Wildlife abundance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Borchers DL, Burnham KP (2004) General formulation for distance sampling. In: Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Laake JL, Borchers DL, Thomas L (eds) Advanced distance sampling. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 307–392Google Scholar
  2. Borchers DL, Marques TA, Gunnlaugsson T, Jupp PE (2010) Estimating distance sampling detection functions when distances are measured with errors. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 15: 346–361MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buckland ST (1992) Fitting density functions with polynomials. Appl Stat 41: 63–76MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Laake JL, Borchers DL, Thomas L (2001) Introduction to distance sampling—estimating abundance of biological populations. Oxford University Press, OxfordMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Butler M, Wallace M, Ballard W, DeMaso S, Applegate R (2005) From the field: the relationship of Rio Grande wild turkey distributions to roads. Wildl Soc Bull 33(2): 745–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cox MJ, Borchers DL, Demer DA, Cutter GR, Brierley AS (2011) Estimating the density of antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) from multi-beam echo-sounder observations using distance sampling methods. Appl Stat 60: 301–316MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. del Rey EG, Rodriguez-Lorenzo JA (2011) Avian mortality due to power lines in the Canary Islands with special reference to the steppe-land birds. J Nat Hist 45: 2159–2169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dorrough J, Yen A, Turner V, Clark SG, Crosthwaite J, Hirth JR (2004) Livestock grazing management and biodiversity conservation in Australian temperate grassy landscapes. Aust J Agric Res 55: 279–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Erxleben D, Butler M, Ballard W, Wallace M, Peterson M, Silvy N, Kuvlesky W, Hewitt D, DeMaso S, Hardin J, Dominguez-Brazil M (2011) Wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) association to roads: implications for distance sampling. Eur J Wildl Res 57: 57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. ESRI (2011) ArcGIS: Release 9.3. Redlands, California: Environmental Systems Research Institute 1999–2010Google Scholar
  11. Fewster RM, Buckland ST (2004) Assessment of distance sampling estimators. In: Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Laake JL, Borchers DL, Thomas L (eds) Advanced distance sampling. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 281–306Google Scholar
  12. Fewster RM, Buckland ST, Burnham KP, Borchers DL, Jupp PE, Laake JL, Thomas L (2009) Estimating the encounter rate variance in distance sampling. Biometrics 65: 225–236MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fletcher D (2007) Pest or guest: the zoology of overabundance. Chapter Managing Eastern Grey Kangaroos Macropus giganteus in the Australian capital territory: reducing the overabundance—of opinion. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman, NSW, pp 117–128Google Scholar
  14. Fletcher JR, Hutto LR (2006) Estimating detection probabilities of river birds using double surveys. Auk 123: 695–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. George J, Zeh J, Suydam R, Clark C (2004) Abundance and population trend (1978–2001) of western Arctic bowhead whales surveyed near Barrow. Mar Mamm Sci 20: 755–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Giunchi D, Gaggini V, Baldaccini N (2007) Distance sampling as an effective method for monitoring feral pigeon (Columba livia f. domestica) urban populations. Urb Ecosyst 10: 397–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hedley SL, Buckland ST (2004) Spatial models for line transect sampling. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 9(2): 181–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Katsanevakis S (2007) Density surface modelling with line transect sampling as a tool for abundance estimation of marine benthic species: the Pinna nobilis example in a marine lake. Mar Biol 152: 77–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lancia RA, Kendall WL, Pollock KH, Nichols JD (2005) Estimating the number of animals in wildlife populations. In: Techniques for wildlife investigations and management. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, pp 106–153Google Scholar
  20. Marques FFC, Buckland ST (2003) Incorporating covariates into standard line transect analyses. Biometrics 59: 924–935MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marques TA, Thomas L, Fancy SG, Buckland ST (2007) Improving estimates of bird density using multiple covariate distance sampling. Auk 124: 1229–1243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marques TA, Buckland ST, Borchers DL, Tosh D, McDonald RA (2010) Point transect sampling along linear features. Biometrics 66: 1247–1255MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McShea WJ, Stewart CM, Kearns L, Bates S (2011) Road bias for deer density estimates at 2 national parks in Maryland. Wildl Soc Bull 35(3): 177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. R Development Core Team (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0Google Scholar
  25. Southwell C (1989) Techniques for monitoring the abundance of kangaroo and wallaby populations. In: Grigg G, Jarman P, Hume I (eds) Kangaroos, wallabies and ratkangaroos, Surrey Beatty, Sydney, pp 659–693Google Scholar
  26. Thomas L, Buckland ST, Rexstad EA, Laake JL, Strindberg S, Hedley SL, Bishop JR, Marques TA, Burnham KP (2010) Distance software: design and analysis of distance sampling surveys for estimating population size. J Appl Ecol 47: 5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vargas A, Jimenez I, Palomares F, Palacios MJ (2002) Distribution, status, and conservation needs of the golden-crowned sifaka (Propithecus tattersalli). Biol Conserv 108: 325–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Venturato E, Cavallini P, Dessa-Fulgheri F (2010) Are pheasants attracted or repelled by roads? A test of a crucial assumption for transect censuses. Eur J Wildl Res 56: 233–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Williams BK, Nichols JD, Conroy MJ (2002) Analysis and management of animal populations. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tiago A. Marques
    • 1
    • 2
  • Stephen T. Buckland
    • 1
  • Regina Bispo
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Brett Howland
    • 5
  1. 1.Centre for Research into Ecological and Environmental ModellingUniversity of St AndrewsSt AndrewsUK
  2. 2.Centro de Estatística e Aplicações da Universidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  3. 3.ISPA, Instituto UniversitárioLisbonPortugal
  4. 4.Bio3 - Estudos e Projectos em Biologia e Valorizaç ão de Recursos NaturaisLdaPortugal
  5. 5.Fenner School of Environment and Society, ANU College of Medicine, Biology & EnvironmentThe Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations