Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21831888›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2012

Challenges of ecological monitoring: estimating population abundance from sparse trap counts.

Natalia Petrovskaya, Sergei Petrovskii, Archie K Murchie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Natalia PetrovskayaSchool of Mathematics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. n.b.petrovskaya@bham.ac.uk
Sergei Petrovskii
Archie K Murchie

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological monitoring aims to provide estimates of pest species abundance-this information being then used for making decisions about means of control. For invertebrate species, population size estimates are often based on trap counts which provide the value of the population density at the traps' location. However, the use of traps in large numbers is problematic as it is costly and may also be disruptive to agricultural procedures. Therefore, the challenge is to obtain a reliable population size estimate from sparse spatial data. The approach we develop in this paper is based on the ideas of numerical integration on a coarse grid. We investigate several methods of numerical integration in order to understand how badly the lack of spatial data can affect the accuracy of results. We first test our approach on simulation data mimicking spatial population distributions of different complexity. We show that, rather counterintuitively, a robust estimate of the population size can be obtained from just a few traps, even when the population distribution has a highly complicated spatial structure. We obtain an estimate of the minimum number of traps required to calculate the population size with good accuracy. We then apply our approach to field data to confirm that the number of trap/sampling locations can be much fewer than has been used in many monitoring programmes. We also show that the accuracy of our approach is greater that that of the statistical method commonly used in field studies. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings for ecological monitoring practice and show that the use of trap numbers 'smaller than minimum' may still be possible but it would result in a paradigm shift: the population size estimates should be treated probabilistically and the arising uncertainty may introduce additional risk in decision-making.

Indexed as

EcosystemModels, TheoreticalAnimalsComputer SimulationData CollectionDemographyPest ControlPopulation Density

Identifiers

PMID21831888
PMCPMC3262429

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.