MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411010200 · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111207

Estimating the landscape-scale abundance of an arboreal folivore using thermal imaging drones and binomial N-mixture modelling

2025· article· en· W4411010200 on OpenAlexaff
Shelby A. Ryan, Darren Southwell, Chad T. Beranek, John Clulow, Neil R. Jordan, Ryan R. Witt

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Conservation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
FundersNational Parks and Wildlife ServiceRoyal Zoological Society of New South WalesTaronga Conservation Society AustraliaEcological Society of AustraliaPaddy Pallin FoundationCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationEquity TrusteesAustralian Academy of ScienceHolsworth Wildlife Research Endowment
KeywordsArboreal locomotionAbundance (ecology)Scale (ratio)EcologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyHabitatCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimating the abundance of wildlife populations at a landscape-scale is vital for conservation, but is often hampered by survey costs, data processing and imperfect detection. In this study, we developed a framework that combines a protocol for validating nocturnal thermal drone detections in real-time with N-mixture modelling to estimate the landscape-scale abundance of arboreal folivores. As a case study, we estimated the abundance of koalas ( Phascolarctos cinereus ) across seven reserves (673 km 2 ) in New South Wales, Australia. We conducted thermal drone surveys of 208, 25-ha sites stratified across vegetation type and fire history, on average, three times over consecutive nights (range 1–12 repeats), between 18:00–04:00 h (May to September). All koala detections were validated by field personnel or in real-time with drones equipped with a thermal camera and searchlight. Koalas were detected on 245 occasions. We fitted N-mixture models to validated repeat count data to quantify the effect of site and observation variables on abundance and detectability. Using our top set of competing models, we estimated that 4357 koalas (95 % CI = 2319–8307) occupy the seven reserves, with a mean detection probability of 0.22 (95 % CI = 0.15–0.31) over all survey occasions. We found detection probability decreased with increases in relative humidity and temperature. Koala abundance was negatively associated with fire severity, elevation, tree height and soil clay content, and positively associated with available water content, forest cover and soil organic carbon. Our framework, which combines real-time field validated drone data while accounting for imperfect detection, improves the accuracy of abundance estimates for arboreal folivores across large-scales.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological ConservationSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207