Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Pairing call-response surveys and distance sampling for a mammalian carnivore
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Pairing call-response surveys and distance sampling for a mammalian carnivore
Do you wish to request the book?
Pairing call-response surveys and distance sampling for a mammalian carnivore
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Pairing call-response surveys and distance sampling for a mammalian carnivore
2015
Overview
Density estimates accounting for differential animal detectability are difficult to acquire for wide-ranging and elusive species such as mammalian carnivores. Pairing distance sampling with call-response surveys may provide an efficient means of tracking changes in populations of coyotes (Canis latrans), a species of particular interest in the eastern United States. Blind field trials in rural New York State indicated 119-m linear error for triangulated coyote calls, and a 1.8-km distance threshold for call detectability, which was sufficient to estimate a detection function with precision using distance sampling. We conducted statewide road-based surveys with sampling locations spaced ≥6 km apart from June to August 2010. Each detected call (be it a single or group) counted as a single object, representing 1 territorial pair, because of uncertainty in the number of vocalizing animals. From 524 survey points and 75 detections, we estimated the probability of detecting a calling coyote to be 0.17 ± 0.02 SE, yielding a detection-corrected index of 0.75 pairs/10 km2 (95% CI: 0.52–1.1, 18.5% CV) for a minimum of 8,133 pairs across rural New York State. Importantly, we consider this an index rather than true estimate of abundance given the unknown probability of coyote availability for detection during our surveys. Even so, pairing distance sampling with call-response surveys provided a novel, efficient, and noninvasive means of monitoring populations of wide-ranging and elusive, albeit reliably vocal, mammalian carnivores. Our approach offers an effective new means of tracking species like coyotes, one that is readily extendable to other species and geographic extents, provided key assumptions of distance sampling are met. © 2015 The Wildlife Society.
