ArticlePloS one2015
Re-constructing historical Adélie penguin abundance estimates by retrospectively accounting for detection bias.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Record phenological responses to climate change in three sympatric penguin species.The Journal of animal ecology · 2026Article
- Emerging evidence of resource limitation in an Antarctic seabird metapopulation after 6 decades of sustained population growth.Oecologia · 2021Article
- Aerial photography based census of Adélie Penguin and its application in CHScientific reports · 2017Article
- Spatially Extensive Standardized Surveys Reveal Widespread, Multi-Decadal Increase in East Antarctic Adélie Penguin Populations.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Seabirds and other land-breeding marine predators are considered to be useful and practical indicators of the state of marine ecosystems because of their dependence on marine prey and the accessibility of their populations at breeding colonies. Historical counts of breeding populations of these higher-order marine predators are one of few data sources available for inferring past change in marine ecosystems. However, historical abundance estimates derived from these population counts may be subject to unrecognised bias and uncertainty because of variable attendance of birds at breeding colonies and variable timing of past population surveys. We retrospectively accounted for detection bias in historical abundance estimates of the colonial, land-breeding Adélie penguin through an analysis of 222 historical abundance estimates from 81 breeding sites in east Antarctica. The published abundance estimates were de-constructed to retrieve the raw count data and then re-constructed by applying contemporary adjustment factors obtained from remotely operating time-lapse cameras. The re-construction process incorporated spatial and temporal variation in phenology and attendance by using data from cameras deployed at multiple sites over multiple years and propagating this uncertainty through to the final revised abundance estimates. Our re-constructed abundance estimates were consistently higher and more uncertain than published estimates. The re-constructed estimates alter the conclusions reached for some sites in east Antarctica in recent assessments of long-term Adélie penguin population change. Our approach is applicable to abundance data for a wide range of colonial, land-breeding marine species including other penguin species, flying seabirds and marine mammals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.