ArticlePloS one2025
The accuracy of capture per unit effort in predicting density of a cryptic snake was more sensitive to reductions in spatial than temporal coverage.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A critical component of monitoring wildlife populations is understanding changes in population size or abundance. However, for most populations a complete census is not possible; thus, trends or abundance need to be estimated through alternative means, such as indexes. An important aspect of using indexes, such as capture per unit effort (CPUE), is validating them as accurate or precise predictors of population trends or abundance. We completed such analyses using data collected from visual surveys and trapping for brown treesnakes (Boiga irregularis) within a 5-ha enclosure that was undergoing a continuous population decline. During a ~ 6-year period, we censused and marked the snake population to fully enumerated the population, with new individuals resulting from births and removals resulting only from mortality (natural or experimental). From trapping and visual surveys, we were also able to calculate CPUE as a function of trap nights or km surveyed and used regressions to forecast snake density (snakes/km) in the enclosure from CPUE. We also rarefied the true dataset to measure whether reductions in sampling intensity, either temporally or spatially, affected the accuracy or precision in predicting snake density from CPUE. We found that trap CPUE demonstrated no statistical relationship to density based on our study methods. CPUE during visual surveys did predict actual density, with sufficient spatial and temporal sampling intensity. CPUE from visual surveys was relatively robust against reductions in temporal sampling when spatial intensity remained high. However, reductions in the spatial area covered to less than 50% of the enclosure rapidly reduced the accuracy and precision in using CPUE to forecast density. Our results indicate that visual surveys are a relatively accurate measure of true density for brown treesnakes, given sufficient spatial sampling effort. The spatial area of coverage required for CPUE to accurately predict changes in abundance was, however, intense with > 50% of the spatial area required to be sampled on a given sampling night. Our results indicate that CPUE is only reliable as an index of abundance or population trends for cryptic snakes, if sampling effort covers most of the landscape over which populations are being estimated.
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.