Evaluation Of Aerial Strip-Transect Surveys For Estimating Average Use By Waterfowl Wintering At Sequoyah National Wildlife Refuge, Oklahoma, 2012-2014.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In 2012, we evaluated aerial transects (strip transects) for surveying wintering waterfowl at Sequoyah NWR and the landscape immediately surrounding the refuge. In surveying the landscape around the refuge, we attempted to capture the area used by waterfowl making daily commute flights to forage off refuge (Johnson et al. 2014). In total, we surveyed 26,895 hectares, with the 8,464.8 hectare refuge comprising 31% of the survey area. The survey consisted of 33 transects that ranged in length from 1.3 km to 12.0 km (Figure 1); on-refuge survey consisted of 26 transects that ranged in length from 0.6 km to 7.3 km. Our purpose was to examine the feasibility of aerial surveys and to develop waterfowl density and population estimates for local biological planning efforts, such as developing population estimates linked to energetic carrying capacity models (Reinecke and Loesch 1996, Michot 1997).Between February 2012 and February 2014, eleven surveys were conducted; two in the 2011-2012 non-breeding period, five in the 2012-2013 non-breeding period and 4 in the 2013-2014 non-breeding period. Due to low numbers of waterfowl observations off-refuge, we discontinued off-refuge surveys in the 2013-2014 winter period. Flight procedures (height above ground, air speed, etc.) followed the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP; Schmidt et al. 2014), and attempts were made to identify waterfowl observed to species (Bowman 2014).Peak on-refuge population estimates varied by guild and year (Tables 2A-E). Peak estimates were 31,871.7 ± 13,085.7 (SE) for Mallards in mid-January 2013; 3,848.6 ± 1,206.5 (SE) for Gadwall in late-November 2012; 3,722.7 ± 2,101.3 (SE) for all other species of dabbling ducks combined but excluding Mallards and Gadwall in February 2012; 314.7 ± 132.5 (SE) for all species of diving ducks combined in January 2014; and 32,935.1 ± 13,049.9 (SE) for Lesser Snow Geese and Canada Geese combined in mid-January 2013. Precision for individual on-refuge survey estimates was generally poor (CV > 20%). We had >1 on-refuge survey per month in all years combined for the months of December (N = 2), January (N = 4), and February (N = 3). The mean on-refuge population estimate for Mallards was 11,200 ± 3,626 (SE) in December, 18,266 ± 2,326 (SE) in January, and 18,678 ± 3,177 (SE) in February. For the same months respectively, mean population estimates for Gadwall were 1,468 ± 452 (SE), 1,034 ± 105 (SE), and 577 ± 115 (SE) and for Lesser Snow Geese and Canada Geese combined were 17,486 ± 5,507 (SE), 23,131 ± 2,454 (SE) and 15,177 ± 3,134 (SE). The precision of average monthly on-refuge estimates was considerably better than for individual survey periods. Precision for average on-refuge estimates for November and January were < 20% for Mallards, Gadwall and Geese; precision of average on-refuge estimates for December was around 30% for Mallards, Gadwall, and Geese (Table 3). Despite insufficient precision for individual survey estimates, average monthly on-refuge population estimates had suitable precision (CVs <20%) with as few as three surveys per month (Table 3). Waterfowl populations are known to widely fluctuate over time (NAWMP 2012). As such, individual population estimates lack both precision and the ability to reflect the range of waterfowl numbers and are not appropriate for use in biological planning efforts. Rather, average estimates for a given month or period taken over >1 year should be used if suitably precise (i.e., CV <20%) and can incorporate the full range of waterfowl population numbers for the area and time of interest. Aerial surveys of waterfowl wintering at SNWR should be repeated in the future to determine if average use by wintering waterfowl has changed over time and if the energetic requirements of local populations are being met by the resources available within the landscape.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».