A comparison of direct and distance sampling methods to estimate abundance of nesting gulls

Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13157/arla.61.2.2014.367

Authors: Christophe BARBRAUD, Matthieu FORTIN, Yohan CHARBONNIER, Karine DELORD, Hélène GADENNE, Jean-Baptiste THIEBOT and Guillaume GÉLINAUD

E-mail: barbraud@cebc.cnrs.fr

Published: Volume 61.2, December 2014. Pages 367-377.

Language: English


We compared the performances of the strip transect count method and the distance sampling method during colony surveys of large gulls to estimate the total number of nests. Ten colonies were surveyed by both methods. Nest detection probabilities varied from 0.519 ± 0.064 to 0.706 ± 0.049 and the average nest detection probability was 0.614 ± 0.015. Nest densities were highly variable, ranging from 77 nests/ha to 717 nests/ha. Estimates of the number of nests obtained by the strip transect count method averaged 9.3% lower than those obtained by distance sampling but by as much as 31% in some colonies. Underestimation by the strip transect counts increased at high nest densities (Kendall t = -0.556, P = 0.032). The strip transect method needed on average 6.5 observers per colony surveyed, whereas the distance sampling method required 1.4 observers per colony. In addition, the mean time spent per colony was 3 hours vs 1.7 hours for the strip transect and distance sampling methods respectively. Combining both these measures of effort, distance sampling required on average 87% less effort in the field than the strip transect method. We strongly advocate the use of distance sampling for surveys of large gull colonies.

Enter your email and password to access the contents of the subscribers of the magazine. If you are not subscribed click here

We use own and third party cookies for the proper operation of the Website, carrying out analytical metrics, showing multimedia content and advertising, and interacting with social networks. More information in our Cookies Policy.
Accept Exit