Abstract
Monitoring programs, where numbers of individuals are followed through time, are central to conservation. Although incomplete detection is expected with wildlife surveys, this topic is rarely considered with plants. However, if plants are missed in surveys, raw count data can lead to biased estimates of population abundance and vital rates. To illustrate, we had five independent observers survey patches of the rare plant Asclepias meadii at two prairie sites. We analyzed data with two mark-recapture approaches. Using the program CAPTURE, the estimated number of patches equaled the detected number for a burned site, but exceeded detected numbers by 28% for an unburned site. Analyses of detected patches using Huggins models revealed important effects of observer, patch state (flowering/nonflowering), and patch size (number of stems) on probabilities of detection. Although some results were expected (i.e. greater detection of flowering than nonflowering patches), the importance of our approach is the ability to quantify the magnitude of detection problems. We also evaluated the degree to which increased observer numbers improved detection: smaller groups (3–4 observers) generally found 90 – 99% of the patches found by all five people, but pairs of observers or single observers had high error and detection depended on which individuals were involved. We conclude that an intensive study at the start of a long-term monitoring study provides essential information about probabilities of detection and what factors cause plants to be missed. This information can guide development of monitoring programs.
Highlights
Conservation biologists use long-term monitoring to characterize population trajectories, quantify rates of survival and fecundity, and explore how population data relate to management
CAPTURE can account for variability in probability of detection: we focused on ‘‘temporal’’ variation and ‘‘heterogeneity’’
In our work on A. meadii, we had hoped that five observers would prove unnecessary for monitoring
Summary
Conservation biologists use long-term monitoring to characterize population trajectories, quantify rates of survival and fecundity, and explore how population data relate to management. Population monitoring depends on observers’ records of the number of plants and animals in field environments. Conservation biologists need to explicitly consider detection issues in field protocols and data analysis [1,2,3]. Many zoologists do use methods that provide estimates of population size and vital rates despite incomplete detection [4,5,6]. Ignoring incomplete detection can lead to bias in estimating plant population distributions, sizes, survival and recruitment rates, as well as population growth rates and extinction probabilities [7,10,12,13,14,15,16]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
