Search

Throughout the Himalaya, mountain ungulates are threatened by hunting for meat and body parts, habitat loss, and competition with livestock. Accurate population estimates are important for conservation management but most of the available methods to estimate ungulate densities are difficult to implement in mountainous terrain. Here, we tested the efficacy of the recent extension of the point transect method, using camera traps for estimating density of two mountain ungulates: the group-living Himalayan blue sheep or bharal Pseudois nayaur and the solitary Himalayan musk deer Moschus leucogaster. We deployed camera traps in 2017–2018 for the bharal (summer: 21 locations; winter: 25) in the trans-Himalayan region (3,000–5,000 m) and in 2018–2019 for the musk deer (summer: 30 locations; winter: 28) in subalpine habitats (2,500–3,500 m) in the Upper Bhagirathi basin, Uttarakhand, India. Using distance sampling with camera traps, we estimated the bharal population to be 0.51 ± SE 0.1 individuals/km2 (CV = 0.31) in summer and 0.64 ± SE 0.2 individuals/km2 (CV = 0.37) in winter. For musk deer, the estimated density was 0.4 ± SE 0.1 individuals/km2 (CV = 0.34) in summer and 0.1 ± SE 0.05 individuals/km2 (CV = 0.48) in winter. The high variability in these estimates is probably a result of the topography of the landscape and the biology of the species. We discuss the potential application of distance sampling with camera traps to estimate the density of mountain ungulates in remote and rugged terrain, and the limitations of this method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The most popular method used to obtain information on population size is distance sampling, and the most commonly used form of distance sampling is line transect sampling (Buckland et al. [3]; Spaan et al. [5]). This paper propagates poor practices that are too prevalent in primate surveys: use of methods that have long been superceded by improved methods; very small numbers of transects; no randomization of the design. We reiterate the need for sufficient replicates, placed in the desired area of inference independently of the animal distribution, to obtain robust estimates of population size using distance sampling. [Extracted from the article]

A twelve-year hiatus in fishery-independent marine mammal surveys in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (ETP), combined with a mandate to monitor dolphin stock status under international agreements and the need for reliable stock status information to set dolphin bycatch limits in the tuna purse-seine fishery, has renewed debate about how best to assess and monitor ETP dolphin stock status. The high cost of replicating previous ship-based surveys has intensified this debate. In this review, transect methods for estimating animal abundance from dedicated research surveys are considered, with a focus on both contemporary and potential methods suitable for surveying large areas for dolphin species that can form large, multi-species aggregations. Covered in this review are potential improvements to the previous ship-based survey methodology, other ship-based methods, alternative approaches based on high-resolution imagery and passive acoustics, and combinations of ship-based and alternative approaches. It is concluded that for immediate management needs, ship-based surveys, with some suggested modifications to improve precision, are the only reliable option despite their high cost. However, it is recommended that a top research priority should be development of composite methods. Pilot studies on the use of high-resolution imagery and passive acoustics for development of indices of relative abundance to be used in composite methods should be part of any future ship-based survey efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Line transect sampling is a distance sampling method for estimating the abundance of wild animal populations. One key assumption of this method is that all animals are detected at their initial location. Animal movement independent of the transect and observer can thus cause substantial bias. We present an analytic expression for this bias when detection within the transect is certain (strip transect sampling) and use simulation to quantify bias when detection falls off with distance from the line (line transect sampling). We also explore the non-linear relationship between bias, detection, and animal movement by varying detectability and movement type. We consider animals that move in randomly orientated straight lines, which provides an upper bound on bias, and animals that are constrained to a home range of random radius. We find that bias is reduced when animal movement is constrained, and bias is considerably smaller in line transect sampling than strip transect sampling provided that mean animal speed is less than observer speed. By contrast, when mean animal speed exceeds observer speed the bias in line transect sampling becomes comparable with, and may exceed, that of strip transect sampling. Bias from independent animal movement is reduced by the observer searching further perpendicular to the transect, searching a shorter distance ahead and by ignoring animals that may overtake the observer from behind. However, when animals move in response to the observer, the standard practice of searching further ahead should continue as the bias from responsive movement is often greater than that from independent movement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Line transect surveys are widely used for estimating abundance of primate populations. The method relies on a small number of key assumptions, and if these are not met, substantial bias may occur. For a variety of reasons, primate surveys often do not follow what is generally considered to be best practice, either in survey design or in analysis. The design often comprises too few lines (sometimes just 1), subjectively placed or placed along trails, so lacks both randomization and adequate replication. Analysis often involves flawed or inefficient models, and often uses biased estimates of the locations of primate groups relative to the line. We outline the standard method, emphasizing the assumptions underlying the approach. We then consider options for when it is difficult or impossible to meet key assumptions. We explore the performance of these options by simulation, focusing particularly on the analysis of primate group sizes, where many of the variations in survey methods have been developed. We also discuss design issues, field methods, analysis, and potential alternative methodologies for when standard line transect sampling cannot deliver reliable abundance estimates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Line transect sampling is widely used for estimating abundance of primate populations. Researchers commonly use animal-to-observer distances (AODs) in analysis, in preference to perpendicular distances from the line, which is in marked contrast with standard practice for other applications of line transect sampling. We formalize the mathematical shortcomings of approaches based on AODs, and show that they are likely to give strongly biased estimates of density. We review papers that claim good performance for the method, and explore this performance through simulations. These confirm strong bias in estimates of density using AODs. We conclude that AOD methods are conceptually flawed, and that they cannot in general provide valid estimates of density. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Double-observer line transect methods are becoming increasingly widespread, especially for the estimation of marine mammal abundance from aerial and shipboard surveys when detection of animals on the line is uncertain. The resulting data supplement conventional distance sampling data with two-sample mark–recapture data. Like conventional mark–recapture data, these have inherent problems for estimating abundance in the presence of heterogeneity. Unlike conventional mark–recapture methods, line transect methods use knowledge of the distribution of a covariate, which affects detection probability (namely, distance from the transect line) in inference. This knowledge can be used to diagnose unmodeled heterogeneity in the mark–recapture component of the data. By modeling the covariance in detection probabilities with distance, we show how the estimation problem can be formulated in terms of different levels of independence. At one extreme, full independence is assumed, as in the Petersen estimator (which does not use distance data); at the other extreme, independence only occurs in the limit as detection probability tends to one. Between the two extremes, there is a range of models, including those currently in common use, which have intermediate levels of independence. We show how this framework can be used to provide more reliable analysis of double-observer line transect data. We test the methods by simulation, and by analysis of a dataset for which true abundance is known. We illustrate the approach through analysis of minke whale sightings data from the North Sea and adjacent waters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

1. Distance sampling is a widely used technique for estimating the size or density of biological populations. Many distance sampling designs and most analyses use the software Distance. 2. We briefly review distance sampling and its assumptions, outline the history, structure and capabilities of Distance, and provide hints on its use. 3. Good survey design is a crucial prerequisite for obtaining reliable results. Distance has a survey design engine, with a built-in geographic information system, that allows properties of different proposed designs to be examined via simulation, and survey plans to be generated. 4. A first step in analysis of distance sampling data is modelling the probability of detection. Distance contains three increasingly sophisticated analysis engines for this: conventional distance sampling, which models detection probability as a function of distance from the transect and assumes all objects at zero distance are detected; multiple-covariate distance sampling, which allows covariates in addition to distance; and mark–recapture distance sampling, which relaxes the assumption of certain detection at zero distance. 5. All three engines allow estimation of density or abundance, stratified if required, with associated measures of precision calculated either analytically or via the bootstrap. 6. Advanced analysis topics covered include the use of multipliers to allow analysis of indirect surveys (such as dung or nest surveys), the density surface modelling analysis engine for spatial and habitat modelling, and information about accessing the analysis engines directly from other software. 7. Synthesis and applications. Distance sampling is a key method for producing abundance and density estimates in challenging field conditions. The theory underlying the methods continues to expand to cope with realistic estimation situations. In step with theoretical developments, state-of-the-art software that implements these methods is described that makes the methods accessible to practising ecologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dominant source of variance in line transect sampling is usually the encounter rate variance. Systematic survey designs are often used to reduce the true variability among different realizations of the design, but estimating the variance is difficult and estimators typically approximate the variance by treating the design as a simple random sample of lines. We explore the properties of different encounter rate variance estimators under random and systematic designs. We show that a design-based variance estimator improves upon the model-based estimator of Buckland et al. (2001, Introduction to Distance Sampling. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 79) when transects are positioned at random. However, if populations exhibit strong spatial trends, both estimators can have substantial positive bias under systematic designs. We show that poststratification is effective in reducing this bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]