Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40267070›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Repeatability of wildlife surveys for estimating abundance: A method to assess the consistency of detection probability and animal availability.

David M Delaney, Tyler M Harms, Jonathan P Harris, Dan J Kaminski, Jace R Elliott, Stephen J Dinsmore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David M DelaneyDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7010-840X
Tyler M HarmsIowa Department of Natural Resources, Boone Research Station, Boone, Iowa, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0093-0596
Jonathan P HarrisDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.
Dan J KaminskiIowa Department of Natural Resources, Boone Research Station, Boone, Iowa, United States of America.
Jace R ElliottIowa Department of Natural Resources, Boone Research Station, Boone, Iowa, United States of America.
Stephen J DinsmoreDepartment of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A primary consideration of abundance studies that use unmarked animals is whether survey counts accurately reflect the population size or if unknown variation in animal movement or detection probability biases counts irrespective of population size. We posited that high repeatability in counts among temporally replicated surveys would indicate that counts are a good index of abundance. We temporally replicated 49 nocturnal spotlight surveys of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) up to three times each (n = 128 total samples) to test the repeatability of this commonly used wildlife monitoring technique. Repeatability was high (R = 0.86), suggesting spring spotlight surveys provide a reliable index of deer population size in Iowa, USA. Fourteen percent of the variation among replicated counts was explained by day of year and, to a lesser degree, a vegetation green-up index. Detection probability was high (~0.70) early in the sampling season and declined considerably during the following 6 weeks. Deer abundance was greater at sites with higher percent landcovers of forest and hay/pasture and was lower at sites with higher landcover in crops. Our findings suggest deer managers should sample prior to green-up in the spring to maximize the proportion of the population that is detectable, and that accounting for seasonality on detection estimation is important for reliable abundance estimates if sampling occurs over a range of phenological progression. Finally, we show that temporal replication of surveys is a logistically feasible method to assess the reliability of abundance estimates from study designs that are normally conducted with single visits.

Indexed as

Animals, WildDeerAnimalsIowaPopulation DensityProbabilityReproducibility of ResultsSeasons

Identifiers

PMID40267070
PMCPMC12017516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.