ArticlePloS one2021
Evaluation of counting methods for monitoring populations of a cryptic alpine passerine, the rock wren (Passeriformes, Acanthisittidae, Xenicus gilviventris).
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pooling robustness in distance sampling: Avoiding bias when there is unmodelled heterogeneity.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
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
Developing and validating methods to determine trends in populations of threatened species is essential for evaluating the effectiveness of conservation interventions. For cryptic species inhabiting remote environments, this can be particularly challenging. Rock wrens, Xenicus gilviventris, are small passerines endemic to the alpine zone of southern New Zealand. They are highly vulnerable to predation by introduced mammalian predators. Establishing a robust, cost-effective monitoring tool to evaluate population trends in rock wrens is a priority for conservation of both the species and, more broadly, as part of a suite of indicators for evaluating effectiveness of management in New Zealand's alpine ecosystems. We assessed the relative accuracy and precision of three population estimation techniques (mark-resight, distance sampling and simple counts on line transects) for two populations of rock wrens in the Southern Alps over six breeding seasons (2012-2018). The performance of these population estimators was compared to known rock wren population size derived from simultaneous territory mapping. Indices of abundance derived from counts on transects were correlated with territory mapping at both study areas, and performed better than either mark-resight methods or distance sampling. Simple counts on standardised line transects are a highly cost-effective method of monitoring birds because they do not require banding a population. As such, we recommend that line transect counts using the design outlined in this paper be adopted as a standard method for long-term monitoring of rock wren populations. Although species-specific testing is required to validate use of low-cost population indices, our results may have utility for the monitoring of other cryptic passerines in relatively open habitats.
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.