ArticlePeerJ2023
Evaluating differences in density estimation for central Iowa butterflies using two methodologies.
Article in PeerJ, 2023. 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.
- When Do Single-Species Occupancy Models Outperform Multispecies Models?Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
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
The Pollard-Yates transect is a widely used method for sampling butterflies. Data from these traditional transects are analyzed to produce density estimates, which are then used to make inferences about population status or trends. A key assumption of the Pollard-Yates transect is that detection probability is 1.0, or constant but unknown, out to a fixed distance (generally 2.5 m on either side of a transect line). However, species-specific estimates of detection probability would allow for sampling at farther distances, resulting in more detections of individuals. Our objectives were to (1) evaluate butterfly density estimates derived from Pollard-Yates line transects and distance sampling, (2) estimate how detection probabilities for butterflies vary across sampling distances and butterfly wing lengths, and (3) offer advice on future butterfly sampling techniques to estimate population density. We conducted Pollard-Yates transects and distance-sampling transects in central Iowa in 2014. For comparison to densities derived from Pollard-Yates transects, we used Program DISTANCE to model detection probability (p) and estimate density (D) for eight butterfly species representing a range of morphological characteristics. We found that detection probability among species varied beyond 2.5 m, with variation apparent even within 5 m of the line. Such variation correlated with wing size, where species with larger wing size generally had higher detection probabilities. Distance sampling estimated higher densities at the 5-m truncation for five of the eight species tested. At this truncation, detection probability was <0.8 for all species, and ranged from 0.53 to 0.79. With the exception of the little yellow (
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.