ArticleScientific reports2024
Airborne imagery does not preclude detectability issues in estimating bird colony size.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aerial images obtained by drones are increasingly used for ecological research such as wildlife monitoring. Yet detectability issues resulting from animal activity or visibility are rarely considered, although these may lead to biased population size and trend estimates. In this study, we investigated detectability in a census of Malagasy pond heron Ardeola idae colonies on the island of Mayotte. We conducted repeated drone flights over breeding colonies in mangrove habitats during two breeding seasons. We then identified individuals and nests in the images and fitted closed capture-recapture models on nest-detection histories. We observed seasonal variation in the relative abundance of individuals, and intra-daily variation in the relative abundance of individuals-especially immature birds-affecting the availability of nests for detection. The detection probability of nests estimated by capture-recapture varied between 0.58 and 0.74 depending on flyover days and decreased 25% from early to late morning. A simulation showed that three flyovers are necessary to detect a 5-6% decline in colonies of 50 to 200 nests. These results indicate that the detectability of nests of forest-canopy breeding species from airborne imagery can vary over space and time; we recommend the use of capture-recapture methods to control for this bias.
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.