Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
agricultural and biological sciences
Design and Analysis of Line Transect Surveys for Primates
International Journal of Primatology, Volume 31, No. 5, Year 2010
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
Line transect surveys are widely used for estimating abundance of primate populations. The method relies on a small number of key assumptions, and if these are not met, substantial bias may occur. For a variety of reasons, primate surveys often do not follow what is generally considered to be best practice, either in survey design or in analysis. The design often comprises too few lines (sometimes just 1), subjectively placed or placed along trails, so lacks both randomization and adequate replication. Analysis often involves flawed or inefficient models, and often uses biased estimates of the locations of primate groups relative to the line. We outline the standard method, emphasizing the assumptions underlying the approach. We then consider options for when it is difficult or impossible to meet key assumptions. We explore the performance of these options by simulation, focusing particularly on the analysis of primate group sizes, where many of the variations in survey methods have been developed. We also discuss design issues, field methods, analysis, and potential alternative methodologies for when standard line transect sampling cannot deliver reliable abundance estimates. © 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
Authors & Co-Authors
Buckland, Stephen T.
United Kingdom, St Andrews
University of st Andrews
Plumptre, Andrew J.
Uganda, Kampala
Wildlife Conservation Society Uganda
Thomas, Len C.
United Kingdom, St Andrews
University of st Andrews
Rexstad, Eric A.
United Kingdom, St Andrews
University of st Andrews
Statistics
Citations: 221
Authors: 4
Affiliations: 2
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1007/s10764-010-9431-5
ISSN:
01640291
Study Design
Randomised Control Trial
Cross Sectional Study
Study Approach
Quantitative