English   español  
Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/16244
Compartir / Impacto:
Estadísticas
Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE
Citado 21 veces en Web of Knowledge®  |  Ver citas en Google académico
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Título

Recapture processes and biological inference in monitoring burrow-nesting seabirds

AutorSanz-Aguilar, Ana ; Tavecchia, Giacomo ; Mínguez, Eduardo; Massa, Bruno; Lo Valvo, Fabio; Ballesteros, Gustavo A.; González Barberá, Gonzalo ; Amengual, José Francisco; Rodríguez, Ana ; McMinn, Miguel; Oro, Daniel
Palabras claveCapture–recapture analysis
Monitoring scheme
Procellariiformes
Survival probability
Transients
Fecha de publicación25-jul-2009
EditorSpringer
CitaciónJournal of Ornithology 151(1): 133-146 (2010)
ResumenCapture–mark–recapture methods are used widely for monitoring and diagnosis of bird populations as they permit robust estimates of population abundance and demographic parameters (e.g. survival) to be obtained from incomplete records of individual life histories. The statistical analysis of these data relies on the important assumption that individuals of the same local populations (i.e. colony) have the same parameters (the homogeneity assumption). We used data from six medium- to long-term monitoring schemes of local Mediterranean populations of the European Storm Petrel Hydrobates pelagicus to empirically show that the level of individual heterogeneity and the consequent bias in the parameter of interest depend on the recapture methodology, which has important consequences for the experimental design. We found that the recapture probability varied over time and among methodologies. The study design had a strong influence on the proportion of transients caught (i.e. individuals not recaptured after marking); however, the survival probability estimate for resident birds was fairly similar across the studies. The differences found in survival seem to depend on the biological variability between sites (e.g. predation pressure), and not on the recapture methods.
Versión del editorhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10336-009-0435-x
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/16244
DOI10.1007/s10336-009-0435-x
ISSN0021-8375 (Print)
1439-0361 (Online)
Aparece en las colecciones: (CEBAS) Artículos
(IMEDEA) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.
Mostrar el registro completo
 



NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.