Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25558358›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2014

The risks of learning: confounding detection and demographic trend when using count-based indices for population monitoring.

Vincenzo Gervasi, Henrik Brøseth, Olivier Gimenez, Erlend B Nilsen, John D C Linnell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Vincenzo GervasiNorwegian Institute for Nature Research Høgskoleringen 9, 7034, Trondheim, Norway.
Henrik BrøsethNorwegian Institute for Nature Research Høgskoleringen 9, 7034, Trondheim, Norway.
Olivier GimenezCentre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, UMR 5175 Campus CNRS, 1919 Route de Mende, Montpellier Cedex 5, F-34293, France.
Erlend B NilsenNorwegian Institute for Nature Research Høgskoleringen 9, 7034, Trondheim, Norway.
John D C LinnellNorwegian Institute for Nature Research Høgskoleringen 9, 7034, Trondheim, Norway.
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research · NOCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theory recognizes that a treatment of the detection process is required to avoid producing biased estimates of population rate of change. Still, one of three monitoring programmes on animal or plant populations is focused on simply counting individuals or other fixed visible structures, such as natal dens, nests, tree cavities. This type of monitoring design poses concerns about the possibility to respect the assumption of constant detection, as the information acquired in a given year about the spatial distribution of reproductive sites can provide a higher chance to detect the species in subsequent years. We developed an individual-based simulation model, which evaluates how the accumulation of knowledge about the spatial distribution of a population process can affect the accuracy of population growth rate estimates, when using simple count-based indices. Then, we assessed the relative importance of each parameter in affecting monitoring performance. We also present the case of wolverines (Gulo gulo) in southern Scandinavia as an example of a monitoring system with an intrinsic tendency to accumulate knowledge and increase detectability. When the occupation of a nest or den is temporally autocorrelated, the monitoring system is prone to increase its knowledge with time. This happens also when there is no intensification in monitoring effort and no change in the monitoring conditions. Such accumulated knowledge is likely to increase detection probability with time and can produce severe bias in the estimation of the rate and direction of population change over time. We recommend that a systematic sampling of the population process under study and an explicit treatment of the underlying detection process should be implemented whenever economic and logistical constraints permit, as failure to include detection probability in the estimation of population growth rate can lead to serious bias and severe consequences for management and conservation.

Indexed as

Autocorrelationcitizen sciencedemographic monitoringdendetection probabilitylearning periodnestpopulation sizepopulation trendreproduction

Identifiers

PMID25558358
PMCPMC4278816
OpenAlexW2092192624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.