The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MODELING AVIAN ABUNDANCE FROM REPLICATED COUNTS USING BINOMIAL MIXTURE MODELS
Abstract
Abundance estimation in ecology is usually accomplished by capture–recapture, removal, or distance sampling methods. These may be hard to implement at large spatial scales. In contrast, binomial mixture models enable abundance estimation without individual identification, based simply on temporally and spatially replicated counts. Here, we evaluate mixture models using data from the national breeding bird monitoring program in Switzerland, where some 250 1‐km 2 quadrats are surveyed using the territory mapping method three times during each breeding season. We chose eight species with contrasting distribution (wide–narrow), abundance (high–low), and detectability (easy–difficult). Abundance was modeled as a random effect with a Poisson or negative binomial distribution, with mean affected by forest cover, elevation, and route length. Detectability was a logit‐linear function of survey date, survey date‐by‐elevation, and sampling effort (time per transect unit). Resulting covariate effects and parameter estimates were consistent with expectations. Detectability per territory (for three surveys) ranged from 0.66 to 0.94 (mean 0.84) for easy species, and from 0.16 to 0.83 (mean 0.53) for difficult species, depended on survey effort for two easy and all four difficult species, and changed seasonally for three easy and three difficult species. Abundance was positively related to route length in three high‐abundance and one low‐abundance (one easy and three difficult) species, and increased with forest cover in five forest species, decreased for two nonforest species, and was unaffected for a generalist species. Abundance estimates under the most parsimonious mixture models were between 1.1 and 8.9 (median 1.8) times greater than estimates based on territory mapping; hence, three surveys were insufficient to detect all territories for each species. We conclude that binomial mixture models are an important new approach for estimating abundance corrected for detectability when only repeated‐count data are available. Future developments envisioned include estimation of trend, occupancy, and total regional abundance.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
R: A Language for Data Analysis and Graphics
Ihaka, R., & Gentleman, R. (1996) · Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics · doi:10.1080/10618600.1996.10474713 · Cited by 11,220
Random-Effects Models for Longitudinal Data
Laird, N. M., & Ware, J. H. (1982) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529876 · Cited by 8,923
Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance
Krebs, C. J. (1973) · Cited by 4,620
ESTIMATING SITE OCCUPANCY RATES WHEN DETECTION PROBABILITIES ARE LESS THAN ONE
MacKenzie, D. I., Nichols, J. D., Lachman, G. B., Droege, S., Andrew Royle, J., & Langtimm, C. A. (2002) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2248:esorwd]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,481
Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (1998) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2917-7 · Cited by 3,387
Introduction to Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations
Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L., & Thomas, L. (2001) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198506492.001.0001 · Cited by 3,055
(1992) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-03531-4 · Cited by 2,991
Analysis and Management of Animal Populations
Grand, J. B., Williams, B. K., Nichols, J. D., & Conroy, M. J. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802722 · Cited by 2,671
Introduction to Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations
Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L., & Thomas, L. (2001) · Cited by 2,557
Model Selection: An Integral Part of Inference
Buckland, S. T., Burnham, K. P., & Augustin, N. H. (1997) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533961 · Cited by 1,717
Cited by
unmarked: An R Package for Fitting Hierarchical Models of Wildlife Occurrence and Abundance
Fiske, I., & Chandler, R. (2011) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v043.i10 · Cited by 2,357
Camera Traps in Animal Ecology
(2011) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-4-431-99495-4 · Cited by 759
Swanson, A., Kosmala, M., Lintott, C., Simpson, R., Smith, A., & Packer, C. (2015) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2015.26 · Cited by 510
Models for Estimating Abundance from Repeated Counts of an Open Metapopulation
Dail, D., & Madsen, L. (2011) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01465.x · Cited by 382
Metadata
- Authors
- Kéry, M., Royle, J. A., & Schmid, H.
- Venue
- Ecological Applications
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-08
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1450-1461
- ISSN
- 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-5582
- OpenAlex
- W2026259401
- Cited by
- 358
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 11.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MODELING AVIAN ABUNDANCE FROM REPLICATED COUNTS USING BINOMIAL MIXTURE MODELS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/04-1120
- The paper
- Kéry, M., Royle, J. A., & Schmid, H. (2005). MODELING AVIAN ABUNDANCE FROM REPLICATED COUNTS USING BINOMIAL MIXTURE MODELS. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.1890/04-1120
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.