Evaluating methods for sampling stream salamanders across multiple observers and habitat types

Evaluating methods for sampling stream salamanders across multiple observers and habitat types Applied Herpetology 6 (2009) 211–226 www.brill.nl/ah Evaluating methods for sampling stream salamanders across multiple observers and habitat types David Marsh Department of Biology, Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA 24450, USA. E-mail: marshd@wlu.edu Abstract While techniques for sampling pond-breeding amphibians are relatively well-established, comparable meth- ods for stream amphibians are still being developed. Uncertainty about sampling techniques is particularly acute for approaches that involve multiple observers. I evaluated three techniques for sampling stream sala- manders with multiple observers—time-constrained surveys, leaf-litter bags, and controlled-cobble added to the stream. I tested for differences among techniques, differences among habitats, and technique by habitat interactions. I also asked whether coefficients of variation across observers and sample dates differed among methods and habitats. For all species and life-stages, time-constrained surveys produced higher counts of stream salamanders and greater richness estimates than did leaf-litter bags or controlled-cobble surveys. However, interactions between techniques and habitat were never significant, indicating that all the methods detected similar patterns in counts among stream habitats. Coefficients of variation in single-species counts tended to be higher for time-constrained surveys, whereas CVs for species richness were significantly lower for time-constrained surveys. Overall, these results suggest that: (1) time-constrained surveys for stream http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Applied Herpetology Brill

Evaluating methods for sampling stream salamanders across multiple observers and habitat types

Applied Herpetology, Volume 6 (3): 211 – Jan 1, 2009

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/evaluating-methods-for-sampling-stream-salamanders-across-multiple-F90xjmoysG
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2009 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1570-7539
eISSN
1570-7547
D.O.I.
10.1163/157075408X386178
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Applied Herpetology 6 (2009) 211–226 www.brill.nl/ah Evaluating methods for sampling stream salamanders across multiple observers and habitat types David Marsh Department of Biology, Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA 24450, USA. E-mail: marshd@wlu.edu Abstract While techniques for sampling pond-breeding amphibians are relatively well-established, comparable meth- ods for stream amphibians are still being developed. Uncertainty about sampling techniques is particularly acute for approaches that involve multiple observers. I evaluated three techniques for sampling stream sala- manders with multiple observers—time-constrained surveys, leaf-litter bags, and controlled-cobble added to the stream. I tested for differences among techniques, differences among habitats, and technique by habitat interactions. I also asked whether coefficients of variation across observers and sample dates differed among methods and habitats. For all species and life-stages, time-constrained surveys produced higher counts of stream salamanders and greater richness estimates than did leaf-litter bags or controlled-cobble surveys. However, interactions between techniques and habitat were never significant, indicating that all the methods detected similar patterns in counts among stream habitats. Coefficients of variation in single-species counts tended to be higher for time-constrained surveys, whereas CVs for species richness were significantly lower for time-constrained surveys. Overall, these results suggest that: (1) time-constrained surveys for stream

Journal

Applied HerpetologyBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2009

Keywords: SURVEY; GYRINOPHILUS; DESMOGNATHUS; MONITORING; POPULATION INDEX; LOTIC; EURYCEA; AMPHIBIANS; TECHNIQUES

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off