ArticleEcology and evolution2017
Exploiting opportunistic observations to estimate changes in seasonal site use: An example with wetland birds.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Cannot see the diversity for all the species: Evaluating inclusion criteria for local species lists when using abundant citizen science data.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- Exploiting opportunistic observations to estimate changes in seasonal site use: An example with wetland birds.Ecology and evolution · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nonsystematically collected, a.k.a. opportunistic, species observations are accumulating at a high rate in biodiversity databases. Occupancy models have arisen as the main tool to reduce effects of limited knowledge about effort in analyses of opportunistic data. These models are generally using long closure periods (e.g., breeding season) for the estimation of probability of detection and occurrence. Here, we use the fact that multiple opportunistic observations in biodiversity databases may be available even within days (e.g., at popular birding localities) to reduce the closure period to 1 day in order to estimate daily occupancies within the breeding season. We use a hierarchical dynamic occupancy model for daily visits to analyze opportunistic observations of 71 species from nine wetlands during 10 years. Our model derives measures of seasonal site use within seasons from estimates of daily occupancy. Comparing results from our "seasonal site use model" to results from a traditional annual occupancy model (using a closure criterion of 2 months or more) showed that our model provides more detailed biologically relevant information. For example, when the aim is to analyze occurrences of breeding species, an annual occupancy model will over-estimate site use of species with temporary occurrences (e.g., migrants passing by, single itinerary prospecting individuals) as even a single observation during the closure period will be viewed as an occupancy. Alternatively, our model produces estimates of the extent to which sites are actually used. Model validation based on simulated data confirmed that our model is robust to changes and variability in sampling effort and species detectability. We conclude that more information can be gained from opportunistic data with multiple replicates (e.g., several reports per day almost every day) by reducing the time window of the closure criterion to acquire estimates of occupancies within seasons.
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.