ArticleEcology and evolution2020
Assessing the performance of index calibration survey methods to monitor populations of wide-ranging low-density carnivores.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Density and Coexistence Patterns of an Apex Carnivore (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Refining population density estimation from track counts: improving daily travel distance estimates through trailing of large herbivores in the Kalahari, Botswana.Movement ecology · 2025Article
- Estimating Leopard population sizes in western Mozambique using SNP-based capture-mark-recapture models.Journal of mammalogy · 2025Article
- Unsustainable anthropogenic mortality threatens the long-term viability of lion populations in Mozambique.PloS one · 2025Article
- Man versus machine: cost and carbon emission savings of 4G-connected Artificial Intelligence technology for classifying species in camera trap images.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- How "science" can facilitate the politicization of charismatic megafauna counts.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Review
- Carnivore Detection at the Domestic/Wildlife Interface within Mpumalanga Province, South Africa.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Assessing the performance of index calibration survey methods to monitor populations of wide-ranging low-density carnivores.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Apex carnivores are wide-ranging, low-density, hard to detect, and declining throughout most of their range, making population monitoring both critical and challenging. Rapid and inexpensive index calibration survey (ICS) methods have been developed to monitor large African carnivores. ICS methods assume constant detection probability and a predictable relationship between the index and the actual population of interest. The precision and utility of the resulting estimates from ICS methods have been questioned. We assessed the performance of one ICS method for large carnivores-track counts-with data from two long-term studies of African lion populations. We conducted Monte Carlo simulation of intersections between transects (road segments) and lion movement paths (from GPS collar data) at varying survey intensities. Then, using the track count method we estimated population size and its confidence limits. We found that estimates either overstate precision or are too imprecise to be meaningful. Overstated precision stemmed from discarding the variance from population estimates when developing the method and from treating the conversion from tracks counts to population density as a back-transformation, rather than applying the equation for the variance of a linear function. To effectively assess the status of species, the IUCN has set guidelines, and these should be integrated in survey designs. We propose reporting the half relative confidence interval width (HRCIW) as an easily calculable and interpretable measure of precision. We show that track counts do not adhere to IUCN criteria, and we argue that ICS methods for wide-ranging low-density species are unlikely to meet those criteria. Established, intensive methods lead to precise estimates, but some new approaches, like short, intensive, (spatial) capture-mark-recapture (CMR/SECR) studies, aided by camera trapping and/or genetic identification of individuals, hold promise. A handbook of best practices in monitoring populations of apex carnivores is strongly recommended.
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.