4.3 Article

Are nest-detection probability methods relevant for estimating turtle dove breeding populations? a case study in Moroccan agroecosystems

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE RESEARCH
卷 60, 期 4, 页码 673-680

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10344-014-0836-x

关键词

Abundance estimation; Nest searching; Complete count; Capture-recapture; N-mixture model; Streptopelia turtur

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Knowing the population size of game is a basic prerequisite to determining adequate hunting management and conservation strategies and setting up appropriate hunting quotas. This study compared three methods complete count, capture-recapture and N-mixture modelling to estimate a turtle dove Streptopelia turtur breeding population using nest counts. We randomly sampled 143 fruit farms (60 orange orchards and 83 olive orchards) situated in an irrigated area in Morocco at the peak of breeding activity. We calculated the probability of detecting active turtle dove nests using information from two observers who independently searched the same sample plots. We found that (a) the capture-recapture method provided more precise results of nest abundance than N-mixture modelling, and that (b) the probability of nest detection was noticeably different between the two study orchards-higher in the orange orchards than in the olive orchards. Although these two methods are easy to implement and cost-effective for estimating population abundance on a large spatial scale, our results demonstrate that the resulting estimates are prone to bias depending on the tree height of the plantations. Of the three methods for estimating turtle dove abundance, complete counts were preferable for assessing population size. Using the complete counts, the density of turtle dove nests was found to be 2.96 nests/ha in the orange orchards and 0.93 nests/ha in the olive orchards. A density extrapolation to the entire surface area of the Tadla Region indicated a minimum breeding population size of 58,969 pairs (95 % confidence interval: 48,550-69,353).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据