Seabirds at-sea surveys: The line-transect method outperforms the point-transect alternative. Bolduc, F. & Fifield, D., A. The Open Ornithology Journal, 10(1):42-52, 2017. abstract bibtex Methods: We tested whether modeling of detection probabilities, and density estimates with their coefficients of variation obtained from the point-transect method provided more robust and precise results than the more commonly used line-transect method. We subdivided our data by species groups (alcids, and aerialist species), and into two behavior categories (flying vs. swimming). We also computed density estimates from the strip-transect and point count methods, to relate differences between transect methods to their counterparts that do not consider a decreasing probability of detection with distance from the observer. We used data collected in the Gulf of St. Lawrence between 2009 and 2010 when observers simultaneously conducted line-and point-transect sampling. Results: Models of detection probability using the line-transect method had a good fit to the observed data, whereas detection probability histograms of point-transect analyses suggested substantial evasive movements within the 0-50 m interval. This resulted in pointtransect detection probability models displaying poor goodness of fit. Line transects yielded density estimates 1.2-2.6 times higher than those obtained using the point-transect method. Differences in percent coefficients of variation between line-transect and pointtransect density estimates ranged between 0.2 and 5.9. Conclusion: Using 300 m wide line-transects provided the best results, while other methods could lead to biased conclusions regarding species density in the local landscape and the relative composition of seabird communities among species and behavior groups.
@article{
title = {Seabirds at-sea surveys: The line-transect method outperforms the point-transect alternative},
type = {article},
year = {2017},
identifiers = {[object Object]},
keywords = {distance sampling,precision,protocol,seabirds at-sea,seasonal distribution},
pages = {42-52},
volume = {10},
id = {7921fd96-4c5b-3081-9171-9e8fbf8b5758},
created = {2020-06-01T14:29:07.107Z},
file_attached = {true},
profile_id = {9aa84141-6744-3000-aa2d-8b83b70f0402},
group_id = {3addd0f7-d578-34d3-be80-24022cc062a1},
last_modified = {2020-06-03T13:07:37.334Z},
read = {false},
starred = {false},
authored = {false},
confirmed = {true},
hidden = {false},
private_publication = {false},
abstract = {Methods: We tested whether modeling of detection probabilities, and density estimates with their coefficients of variation obtained from the point-transect method provided more robust and precise results than the more commonly used line-transect method. We subdivided our data by species groups (alcids, and aerialist species), and into two behavior categories (flying vs. swimming). We also computed density estimates from the strip-transect and point count methods, to relate differences between transect methods to their counterparts that do not consider a decreasing probability of detection with distance from the observer. We used data collected in the Gulf of St. Lawrence between 2009 and 2010 when observers simultaneously conducted line-and point-transect sampling. Results: Models of detection probability using the line-transect method had a good fit to the observed data, whereas detection probability histograms of point-transect analyses suggested substantial evasive movements within the 0-50 m interval. This resulted in pointtransect detection probability models displaying poor goodness of fit. Line transects yielded density estimates 1.2-2.6 times higher than those obtained using the point-transect method. Differences in percent coefficients of variation between line-transect and pointtransect density estimates ranged between 0.2 and 5.9. Conclusion: Using 300 m wide line-transects provided the best results, while other methods could lead to biased conclusions regarding species density in the local landscape and the relative composition of seabird communities among species and behavior groups.},
bibtype = {article},
author = {Bolduc, François and Fifield, David A.},
journal = {The Open Ornithology Journal},
number = {1}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"8jFu5ae6cCWGFueEj","bibbaseid":"bolduc-fifield-seabirdsatseasurveysthelinetransectmethodoutperformsthepointtransectalternative-2017","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Bolduc, F.","Fifield, D., A."],"bibdata":{"title":"Seabirds at-sea surveys: The line-transect method outperforms the point-transect alternative","type":"article","year":"2017","identifiers":"[object Object]","keywords":"distance sampling,precision,protocol,seabirds at-sea,seasonal distribution","pages":"42-52","volume":"10","id":"7921fd96-4c5b-3081-9171-9e8fbf8b5758","created":"2020-06-01T14:29:07.107Z","file_attached":"true","profile_id":"9aa84141-6744-3000-aa2d-8b83b70f0402","group_id":"3addd0f7-d578-34d3-be80-24022cc062a1","last_modified":"2020-06-03T13:07:37.334Z","read":false,"starred":false,"authored":false,"confirmed":"true","hidden":false,"private_publication":false,"abstract":"Methods: We tested whether modeling of detection probabilities, and density estimates with their coefficients of variation obtained from the point-transect method provided more robust and precise results than the more commonly used line-transect method. We subdivided our data by species groups (alcids, and aerialist species), and into two behavior categories (flying vs. swimming). We also computed density estimates from the strip-transect and point count methods, to relate differences between transect methods to their counterparts that do not consider a decreasing probability of detection with distance from the observer. We used data collected in the Gulf of St. Lawrence between 2009 and 2010 when observers simultaneously conducted line-and point-transect sampling. Results: Models of detection probability using the line-transect method had a good fit to the observed data, whereas detection probability histograms of point-transect analyses suggested substantial evasive movements within the 0-50 m interval. This resulted in pointtransect detection probability models displaying poor goodness of fit. Line transects yielded density estimates 1.2-2.6 times higher than those obtained using the point-transect method. Differences in percent coefficients of variation between line-transect and pointtransect density estimates ranged between 0.2 and 5.9. Conclusion: Using 300 m wide line-transects provided the best results, while other methods could lead to biased conclusions regarding species density in the local landscape and the relative composition of seabird communities among species and behavior groups.","bibtype":"article","author":"Bolduc, François and Fifield, David A.","journal":"The Open Ornithology Journal","number":"1","bibtex":"@article{\n title = {Seabirds at-sea surveys: The line-transect method outperforms the point-transect alternative},\n type = {article},\n year = {2017},\n identifiers = {[object Object]},\n keywords = {distance sampling,precision,protocol,seabirds at-sea,seasonal distribution},\n pages = {42-52},\n volume = {10},\n id = {7921fd96-4c5b-3081-9171-9e8fbf8b5758},\n created = {2020-06-01T14:29:07.107Z},\n file_attached = {true},\n profile_id = {9aa84141-6744-3000-aa2d-8b83b70f0402},\n group_id = {3addd0f7-d578-34d3-be80-24022cc062a1},\n last_modified = {2020-06-03T13:07:37.334Z},\n read = {false},\n starred = {false},\n authored = {false},\n confirmed = {true},\n hidden = {false},\n private_publication = {false},\n abstract = {Methods: We tested whether modeling of detection probabilities, and density estimates with their coefficients of variation obtained from the point-transect method provided more robust and precise results than the more commonly used line-transect method. We subdivided our data by species groups (alcids, and aerialist species), and into two behavior categories (flying vs. swimming). We also computed density estimates from the strip-transect and point count methods, to relate differences between transect methods to their counterparts that do not consider a decreasing probability of detection with distance from the observer. We used data collected in the Gulf of St. Lawrence between 2009 and 2010 when observers simultaneously conducted line-and point-transect sampling. Results: Models of detection probability using the line-transect method had a good fit to the observed data, whereas detection probability histograms of point-transect analyses suggested substantial evasive movements within the 0-50 m interval. This resulted in pointtransect detection probability models displaying poor goodness of fit. Line transects yielded density estimates 1.2-2.6 times higher than those obtained using the point-transect method. Differences in percent coefficients of variation between line-transect and pointtransect density estimates ranged between 0.2 and 5.9. Conclusion: Using 300 m wide line-transects provided the best results, while other methods could lead to biased conclusions regarding species density in the local landscape and the relative composition of seabird communities among species and behavior groups.},\n bibtype = {article},\n author = {Bolduc, François and Fifield, David A.},\n journal = {The Open Ornithology Journal},\n number = {1}\n}","author_short":["Bolduc, F.","Fifield, D., A."],"bibbaseid":"bolduc-fifield-seabirdsatseasurveysthelinetransectmethodoutperformsthepointtransectalternative-2017","role":"author","urls":{},"keyword":["distance sampling","precision","protocol","seabirds at-sea","seasonal distribution"],"downloads":0},"bibtype":"article","creationDate":"2020-12-22T22:02:17.232Z","downloads":0,"keywords":["distance sampling","precision","protocol","seabirds at-sea","seasonal distribution"],"search_terms":["seabirds","sea","surveys","line","transect","method","outperforms","point","transect","alternative","bolduc","fifield"],"title":"Seabirds at-sea surveys: The line-transect method outperforms the point-transect alternative","year":2017}