Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/249271
COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
logo share SHARE logo core CORE BASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE

Invitar a revisión por pares abierta
Título

Roadside Car Surveys: Methodological Constraints and Solutions for Estimating Parrot Abundances across the World

AutorTella, José Luis CSIC ORCID; Romero-Vidal, Pedro; Denés, Francisco V.; Hiraldo, Fernando CSIC ORCID; Toledo, Bernardo; Rossetto, Federica; Blanco, Guillermo CSIC ORCID ; Hernández-Brito, Dailos; Pacífico, Erica C.; Díaz-Luque, José A.; Rojas, Abraham; Bermúdez-Cavero, Alan; Luna, Álvaro CSIC ORCID; Barbosa, Jomar M.; Carrete, Martina CSIC ORCID
Palabras claveBird abundance
Census
Bird density
Detectability
Distance sampling
Psittaciformes
Fecha de publicación1-jul-2021
EditorMultidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
CitaciónDiversity 13(7): 300 (2021)
ResumenParrots stand out among birds because of their poor conservation status and the lack of available information on their population sizes and trends. Estimating parrot abundance is complicated by the high mobility, gregariousness, patchy distributions, and rarity of many species. Roadside car surveys can be useful to cover large areas and increase the probability of detecting spatially aggregated species or those occurring at very low densities. However, such surveys may be biased due to their inability to handle differences in detectability among species and habitats. We conducted 98 roadside surveys, covering > 57,000 km across 20 countries and the main world biomes, recording ca. 120,000 parrots from 137 species. We found that larger and more gregarious species are more easily visually detected and at greater distances, with variations among biomes. However, raw estimates of relative parrot abundances (individuals/km) were strongly correlated (r = 0.86–0.93) with parrot densities (individuals/km2) estimated through distance sampling (DS) models, showing that variability in abundances among species (>40 orders of magnitude) overcomes any potential detectability bias. While both methods provide similar results, DS cannot be used to study parrot communities or monitor the population trends of all parrot species as it requires a minimum of encounters that are not reached for most species (64% in our case), mainly the rarest and more threatened. However, DS may be the most suitable choice for some species-specific studies of common species. We summarize the strengths and weaknesses of both methods to guide researchers in choosing the best–fitting option for their particular research hypotheses, characteristics of the species studied, and logistical constraints.
Versión del editorhttps://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/13/7/300
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/249271
DOI10.3390/d13070300
ISSN1424-2818
Aparece en las colecciones: (MNCN) Artículos




Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato
Blanco_G_Roadside.pdfArtículo principal4,88 MBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Mostrar el registro completo

CORE Recommender

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

11
checked on 05-may-2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

9
checked on 24-feb-2024

Page view(s)

68
checked on 06-may-2024

Download(s)

134
checked on 06-may-2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Este item está licenciado bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons