A comparison of line transect and point count surveys: a case study of spring saltmarsh birds at Chongming Dongtan

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1003.2010.044

Abstract

Abstract:

We compared fixed-distance line transect and fixed-radius point count surveys for estimating saltmarsh bird richness and abundance at Chongming Dongtan. A total of 24 bird species were recorded during five surveys in spring 2008, 19 during line transects and 21 during point counts. The average number of species detected per survey did not differ between the two methods. Density estimates of individual species from the two methods were correlated, suggesting that the two methods consistently estimate relative abundance. However, density of individual species and of all species combined as estimated by point count surveys were higher than those by line transect surveys. Our results indicate that it is important to account for different survey methods when comparing temporal and spatial differences in bird species richness and abundance.

Key words: bird surveys, line transects, point counts, saltmarsh, Chongming Dongtan

Yinting Cai, Xiaojing Gan, Zhijun Ma. A comparison of line transect and point count surveys: a case study of spring saltmarsh birds at Chongming Dongtan[J]. Biodiv Sci, 2010, 18(1): 44-49.

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://www.biodiversity-science.net/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1003.2010.044

https://www.biodiversity-science.net/EN/Y2010/V18/I1/44

Figures/Tables 2

References 23

[1]	Anderson BW, Ohmart RD (1981) Comparisons of avian census results using variable distance transect and variable circular plot techniques. Studies in Avian Biology, 6, 186-192.
[2]	Bajema RA, Devault TL, Scott PE, Lima SL (2001) Reclaimed coal mine grasslands and their significance for henslow’s sparrows in the American Midwest. The Auk, 118, 422-431.
[3]	Bibby C, Burgess N, Hill D, Mustoe S (2000) Bird Census Techniques, 2nd edn. Academic Press, London.
[4]	Bibby C, Jones M, Marsden S (1998) Expedition Field Techniques: Bird Survey. Expedition Advisory Centre, Royal Geographical Society, London.
[5]	Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Laake JL, Borchers DL, Thomas L (2001) Introduction to Distance Sampling. Oxford University Press, New York.
[6]	Casagrande DG, Beissinger SR (1997) Evaluation of four methods for estimating parrot population size. The Condor, 99, 445-457.
[7]	Colwell RK, Coddington JA (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences, 345, 101-118.
[8]	Craig MD (2004) A comparison of species counts and density estimates derived from area searches, line transects and point counts in the jarrah forest of southwestern Australia. Corella, 28, 55-59.
[9]	Dobkin DS, Rich AC (1998) Comparison of line-transect, spot-map, and point-count surveys for birds in riparian habitats of the great basin. Journal of Field Ornithology, 69, 430-443.
[10]	Edwards DK, Dorsey GL, Crawford JA (1981) A comparison of three avian census methods. Studies in Avian Biology, 6, 170-176.
[11]	Greenberg R (2006) Tidal marshes: home for the few and the highly selected. Studies in Avian Biology, 32, 2-9.
[12]	Raman TRS (2003) Assessment of census techniques for interspecific comparisons of tropical rainforest bird densities: a field evaluation in the western Ghats, India. Ibis, 145, 9-21.
[13]	Ratkowsky AV, Rathowsky DA (1979) A survey of the bird of the Mt. Wellington Range, Tasmania, during the non-breeding months. Emu, 78, 223-226.
[14]	Reynolds RT, Scott JM, Nussbaum RA (1980) A variable circular plot method for estimating bird numbers. The Condor, 82, 309-311.
[15]	Roberts JP, Schnell GD (2006) Comparison of survey methods for wintering grassland birds. Journal of Field Ornithology, 77, 46-60.
[16]	Robel RJ, Antholz SJ, Kemp KE, Runco CB (2000) Assessment of avian populations in Kansas tallgrass prairie landscape: two survey methods compared. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, 103, 139-149.
[17]	SPSS Inc. (2003) SPSS for Windows, Release 12.0.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago.
[18]	Sutherland WJ, Newton I, Green RE (2004) Bird Ecology and Conservation. Oxford University Press, New York.
[19]	Verner J, Ritter LV (1985) A comparison of transects and point counts in oak-pine woodlands of California. The Condor, 87, 47-68.
[20]	Wilson RR, Twedt DJ, Elliott AB (2000) Comparison of line transects and point counts for monitoring spring migration in forested wetlands. Journal of Field Ornithology, 71, 345-355.
[21]	Xu HF (徐宏发), Zhao YL (赵云龙) (2005) Scientific Surveys on Chongming Dongtan Migratory Birds Nature Reserve of Shanghai (崇明东滩鸟类自然保护区科学考察集). China Forestry Publishing House, Beijing. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	Xu L (许龙), Zhang ZW (张正旺), Ding CQ (丁长青) (2003) Line transect methods in avian census. Chinese Journal of Ecology (生态学杂志), 22(5), 127-130. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	Zheng GM (郑光美) (1995) Ornithology (鸟类学). Beijing Normal University Press, Beijing. (in Chinese)

鸟类名称 Species	样线法 Line transect surveys	样点法 Point count surveys	P
震旦鸦雀 Paradoxornis heudei	1.17 ± 0.60	2.51 ± 0.78	0.01^{a *}
东方大苇莺 Acrocephalus orientalis	1.12 ± 1.38	1.20 ± 1.27	0.59^a
斑背大尾莺 Locustella pryeri	0.37 ± 0.18	0.61 ± 0.24	0.01^{a *}
棕扇尾莺 Cisticola juncidis	0.30 ± 0.17	0.76 ± 0.27	0.002^{a *}
棕头鸦雀 Paradoxornis webbianus	0.32 ± 0.11	0.55 ± 0.20	0.05^a
攀雀 Remiz consobrinus	0.22 ± 0.39	0.66 ± 0.88	0.22^a
家燕 Hirundo rustica	0.20 ± 0.27	0.75 ± 0.02	0.20^a
大杜鹃 Cuculus canorus	0.15 ± 0.21	0.30 ± 0.42	0.18^b
黑眉苇莺 Acrocephalus bistrigiceps	0.04 ± 0.05	0.07 ± 0.12	0.32^a
蓝胸秧鸡 Gallirallus striatus	0.01 ± 0.01	0.16 ± 0.06	0.004^{a *}
黄苇鳱 Ixobrychus sinensis	0.01 ± 0.01	0.07 ± 0.11	0.18^b
钝翅尾莺 Acrocephalus concinens	0.01 ± 0.01	0.02 ± 0.04	0.18^b
鹤鹬 Tringa erythropus	0.01 ± 0.01	0.02 ± 0.02	0.18^b
青脚鹬 T. nebularia	0.00 ± 0.01	0.02 ± 0.02	0.32^b
黑水鸡 Gallinula chloropus	0.00 ± 0.01	0.01 ± 0.02	0.32^b
池鹭 Ardeola bacchus	0.00 ± 0.01	?	-
白眉鸭 Anas querquedula	0.00 ± 0.01	?	-
北蝗莺 Locustella ochotensis	0.00 ± 0.01	?	-
紫背苇鳱 Ixobrychus eurhythmus	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
黄眉柳莺 Phylloscopus inornatus	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
金腰燕 Hirundo daurica	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
普通翠鸟 Alcedo atthis	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
扇尾沙锥 Gallinago gallinago	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
鹀类 Emberiza spp.	0.19 ± 0.25	0.75 ± 0.99	0.17^a
未识别鸟类 Unidentified birds	0.08 ± 0.08	0.48 ± 0.13	-
总计 Total	4.20 ± 1.35	8.95 ± 1.75	0.01^{a *}

鸟类名称 Species	样线法 Line transect surveys	样点法 Point count surveys	P
震旦鸦雀 Paradoxornis heudei	1.17 ± 0.60	2.51 ± 0.78	0.01^{a *}
东方大苇莺 Acrocephalus orientalis	1.12 ± 1.38	1.20 ± 1.27	0.59^a
斑背大尾莺 Locustella pryeri	0.37 ± 0.18	0.61 ± 0.24	0.01^{a *}
棕扇尾莺 Cisticola juncidis	0.30 ± 0.17	0.76 ± 0.27	0.002^{a *}
棕头鸦雀 Paradoxornis webbianus	0.32 ± 0.11	0.55 ± 0.20	0.05^a
攀雀 Remiz consobrinus	0.22 ± 0.39	0.66 ± 0.88	0.22^a
家燕 Hirundo rustica	0.20 ± 0.27	0.75 ± 0.02	0.20^a
大杜鹃 Cuculus canorus	0.15 ± 0.21	0.30 ± 0.42	0.18^b
黑眉苇莺 Acrocephalus bistrigiceps	0.04 ± 0.05	0.07 ± 0.12	0.32^a
蓝胸秧鸡 Gallirallus striatus	0.01 ± 0.01	0.16 ± 0.06	0.004^{a *}
黄苇鳱 Ixobrychus sinensis	0.01 ± 0.01	0.07 ± 0.11	0.18^b
钝翅尾莺 Acrocephalus concinens	0.01 ± 0.01	0.02 ± 0.04	0.18^b
鹤鹬 Tringa erythropus	0.01 ± 0.01	0.02 ± 0.02	0.18^b
青脚鹬 T. nebularia	0.00 ± 0.01	0.02 ± 0.02	0.32^b
黑水鸡 Gallinula chloropus	0.00 ± 0.01	0.01 ± 0.02	0.32^b
池鹭 Ardeola bacchus	0.00 ± 0.01	?	-
白眉鸭 Anas querquedula	0.00 ± 0.01	?	-
北蝗莺 Locustella ochotensis	0.00 ± 0.01	?	-
紫背苇鳱 Ixobrychus eurhythmus	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
黄眉柳莺 Phylloscopus inornatus	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
金腰燕 Hirundo daurica	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
普通翠鸟 Alcedo atthis	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
扇尾沙锥 Gallinago gallinago	?	0.01 ± 0.02	-
鹀类 Emberiza spp.	0.19 ± 0.25	0.75 ± 0.99	0.17^a
未识别鸟类 Unidentified birds	0.08 ± 0.08	0.48 ± 0.13	-
总计 Total	4.20 ± 1.35	8.95 ± 1.75	0.01^{a *}