Cited by 151Wildlife Ecology and ConservationAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesCensus and Population Estimation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Spoor counts as indices of large carnivore populations: the relationship between spoor frequency, sampling effort and true density

Open access
Stander, P. E.·1998·Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract

1. Studies of large carnivore populations and, particularly, reliable estimates of population density are necessary for effective conservation management. However, these animals are difficult to study, and direct methods of assessing population size and density are often expensive and time‐consuming. 2. Indirect sampling, by counting spoor, could provide repeatable and inexpensive measures of some population parameters. The relationship between true population density and indirect sampling results has seldom been described in large carnivore studies. 3. In northern Namibia the population densities of leopards, lions and wild dogs were measured through recognition of individuals and groups. Spoor counts were then conducted independently, to assess the relationship between true density and the distribution of spoor. 4. Sampling effort, both in terms of the number of roads and total road distance in a sample zone, and the intensity of sampling, had a marked effect on the accuracy and precision of spoor frequency calculations. 5. In a homogeneous habitat, leopard spoor were evenly spread along different roads and spoor frequency was independent of road length. Taking into account very low sample sizes, the spoor density of leopards, lions and wild dogs showed a strong linear correlation with true density. The slope of the regression for leopards was different to that of lions and wild dogs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2664.1998.00313.x

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sample penetration for most LUTs was close to the value of 7 recommended for these techniques.

    “Sample penetration (the ratio of sum of transect lengths (km) to survey area (km2)) for most LUTs was close to the value of 7 recommended for these techniques (Stander, 1998) (Table 2).”

    From The impact of land reform on the status of large carnivores in Zimbabwe (2016) · cites this paper as Stander, 1998

    The Discussion (page unavailable in our copy) reports that desired precision for leopard spoor counts was reached at about 6.5 km² of surface area per kilometre of road sampled, a value close to 7. But this is the inverse of the citing sentence’s transect-length-to-area ratio, and the paper presents it as a result for its experimental zone, not a general recommendation for these techniques. The source cannot establish whether most LUTs in the citing study were close to any value. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Mentis M.T., 1980, Towards a scientific management of terrestrial ecosystems., South African Journal of Science, 76, 536
  2. Norton P.M., 1990, How many leopards? A criticism of Martin and de Meulenaer's population estimates for Africa., South African Journal of Science, 86, 218
  3. Panwar H.S.1979A note on the tiger census technique based on pugmark tracings.Indian Forestry(Special issue on International Symposium on Tiger) February. 70–77.
  4. Schaller G.B., 1972, The Serengeti Lion
  5. Sokal R.R., 1995, Biometry

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Stander, P. E.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Stander, P. E.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-06
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
378-385
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W2023094193
Cited by
151
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Applied Ecology (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Environment
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Census and Population Estimation
Keywords
large carnivores, population density estimation, indirect sampling, sampling effort, leopard, lion, wild dogs, Namibia, wildlife conservation management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review