ArticleEcology and evolution2026
Recommendations for Improving the Modeling of Wintering Waterbird Population Sizes and Trends.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biodiversity monitoring at large spatial and temporal scales is essential for informing conservation policies. The International Waterbird Census (IWC) is one of the longest-running global citizen science monitoring schemes, providing critical information to several international agreements. However, analyzing IWC count data poses statistical challenges, including zero inflation, overdispersion, spatial autocorrelation, and missing data. While various modeling approaches have been used to estimate waterbird population size and trends, their ability to handle these issues and the implications for trend estimates remain unassessed. Using IWC count data from five species in the East Atlantic Flyway, we compared four modeling approaches: TRIM (TRends and Indices for Monitoring data), LORI (Low-Rank Interactions), and two generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) with simple or optimized parametrizations. We benchmarked their performance in addressing zero inflation, overdispersion, and spatial autocorrelation across different realistic sampling designs (i.e., alternative dataset configurations). Our results highlight significant limitations in commonly used methods. Simple GLMMs, TRIM, and LORI generally failed to mitigate both zero inflation and overdispersion. In contrast, optimized GLMMs improved model convergence and better addressed these issues by selecting appropriate probability distributions. However, no single distribution performed consistently well across species and sampling designs. Spatial structures were effective in reducing spatial autocorrelation in most cases. We recommend a careful species-specific selection of statistical methods when analyzing count data, as inadequate models may misrepresent population trends and thus misguide conservation efforts. Future research should explore the integration of advanced hierarchical and spatio-temporal models to improve inference from large-scale citizen science datasets.
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.