Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using the double-observer method to estimate detection probability of two cavity-nesting seabirds in Antarctica: the snow petrel (Pagodroma nivea) and the Wilson’s storm petrel (Oceanites oceanicus)

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Polar Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When estimating the size of seabird populations, count data may be biased due to various factors such as detection probability. Failing to account for detection probability in surveys may lead to an underestimate of population size and may compromise the ability to monitor trends if detection probability varies among surveys. Here, we use the double-observer method to estimate detection probability of cavity-nesting snow petrels (Pagodroma nivea) and Wilson’s storm petrels (Oceanites oceanicus) in East Antarctica. Estimates of single-visit detection probability of nesting/roosting adult snow petrels during the incubation stage of the breeding cycle ranged from 0.86 (SE = 0.04) to 0.87 (SE = 0.04) depending upon observers. Both observers found snow petrel chicks were easier to detect than adults, with estimated detection probability for chicks ranging from 0.92 (SE = 0.03) to 1.00 (SE = 0.34 × 10−5). Detection probability of adult and chick snow petrels increased as cavity volume increased. Compared to snow petrels, estimated detection probability was considerably lower for nesting/roosting Wilson’s storm petrels, ranging from 0.27 (SE = 0.09) to 0.50 (SE = 0.13) for each observer. These estimates of detection probability apply only to those individuals in the population that were potentially viewable or audible. Nevertheless, our results indicate that double-observer counts for ground surveys of cavity-nesting seabirds should improve estimates of population abundance in comparison with single-visit counts. Accounting for observer effects, habitat characteristics and stage of the breeding season on detection probability should also improve estimation of population trends.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson DR (2001) The need to get the basics right in wildlife field studies. Wildl Soc B 29:1294–1297

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson DR (2003) Response to Engeman: index values rarely constitute reliable information. Wildl Soc B 31:288–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbraud C, Delord K, Marteau C, Weimerskirch H (2009) Estimates of population size of white-chinned petrels and grey petrels at Kerguelen Islands and sensitivity to fisheries. Anim Conserv 12:258–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bart J, Earnst S (2002) Double sampling to estimate density and population trends in birds. Auk 119:36–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bart J, Fligner MA, Notz WI (1998) Sampling and statistical methods for behavioural ecologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beck JR, Brown DW (1972) The biology of Wilson’s storm petrels Oceanites oceanicus (Kuhl) at Signy Island, South Orkney Islands. Br Antarct Surv Sci Rep 69:1–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Berrow SD, Croxall JP, Grant SD (2000) Status of white-chinned petrels Procellaria aequinoctialis Linnaeus 1758, at Bird Island, South Georgia. Antarct Sci 12:399–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booms TL, McCaffery BJ (2007) A novel use of passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags as nest markers. J Field Ornithol 78:83–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brothers NP (1984) Breeding, distribution and status of burrow-nesting petrels at Macquarie Island. Aust Wildl Res 11:113–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown DW (1966) Breeding biology of the snow petrel Pagodroma Nivea (Forster). ANARE Sci Rep Ser B 89:1–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckland S, Anderson D, Burnham K, Laake J (1993) Distance sampling: estimating the abundance of biological populations. Chapman & Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multinomial inference. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Catry P, Campos A, Segurado P, Silva M, Strange I (2003) Population census and nesting habitat selection of thin-billed prion Pachyptila belcheri on New Island, Falkland Islands. Polar Biol 26:202–207

    Google Scholar 

  • Croxall JP (1992) Southern Ocean environmental changes: effects on seabird, seal and whale populations. Phil Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 338:319–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croxall JP, Steele WK, McInnes SJ, Prince P (1995) Breeding distribution of the snow petrel Pagodroma nivea. Mar Ornithol 23:69–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Croxall JP, Trathan PN, Murphy EJ (2002) Environmental change and Antarctic seabird populations. Science 297:1510–1514

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cuthbert R (2004) Breeding biology of the Atlantic Petrel, Pterodroma incerta, and a population estimate of this and other burrowing petrels on Gough Island, South Atlantic Ocean. Emu 104:221–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach DR, Brauning DW, Mattice JA (2003) Variability in grassland bird counts related to observer differences and species detection rates. Auk 120:1168–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach DR, Marshall MR, Mattice JA, Brauning DW (2007) Incorporating availability for detection in estimates of bird abundance. Auk 124:96–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farnsworth GL, Pollock KH, Nichols JD, Simons TR, Hines JE, Sauer JR (2002) A removal model for estimating detection probabilities from point-count surveys. Auk 119:414–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher RJ, Hutto RL (2006) Estimating detection probabilities of river birds using double surveys. Auk 123:695–707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederiksen M, Edwards M, Richardson AJ, Halliday NC, Wanless S (2006) From plankton to top predators: bottom-up control of a marine food web across four trophic levels. J Anim Ecol 75:1259–1268. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01148.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths AM, Siegfried WR, Abrams RW (1982) Ecological structure of a pelagic seabird community in the Southern Ocean. Polar Biol 1:39–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guinet C, Chastel O, Koudil M, Durbec JP, Jouventin P (1998) Effects of warm sea-surface temperature anomalies on the blue petrel at the Kerguelen Islands. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 265:1001–1006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrell FE (2001) Regression modelling strategies: with application to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris MP, Wanless S (1991) Population studies and conservation of Puffins Fratercula arctica. In: Hirons GJM (ed) Bird population studies: relevance to conservation and management. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 230–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggins RM (1989) On the statistical analysis of capture experiments. Biometrika 76:133–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huggins RM (1991) Some practical aspects of a conditional likelihood approach to capture experiments. Biometrics 47:725–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt GL, Priddle J, Whitehouse MJ, Veit RR, Heywood RB (1992) Changes in seabird species abundance near South Georgia during a period of rapid change in sea-surface temperature. Antarct Sci 4:15–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenouvrier S, Barbraud C, Weimerskirch H (2005) Long-term contrasted responses to climate of two Antarctic seabird species. Ecology 86:2889–2903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koneff MD, Royle JA, Otto MC, Wortham JS, Bidwell JK (2008) A double-observer method to estimate detection rate during aerial waterfowl surveys. J Wildl Manag 72:1641–1649. doi:10.2193/2008-036

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawton K, Robertson G, Kirkwood R, Valencia J, Schlatter R, Smith D (2006) An estimate of population sizes of burrowing seabirds at the Diego Ramirez archipelago, Chile, using distance sampling and burrow-scoping. Polar Biol 29:229–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchant S, Higgins PJ (1990) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds, vol 1. Ratities to ducks. Oxford University Press, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Montevecchi WA (1993) Birds as indicators of change in marine prey stocks. In: Furness RW, Greenwood JJD (eds) Birds as monitors of environmental change. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 217–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Hines JE, Sauer JR, Fallon FW, Fallon JE, Heglund PJ (2000) A double-observer approach for estimating detection probability and abundance from point counts. Auk 117:393–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olivier F, Wotherspoon SJ (2005) GIS based application of resource selection functions to the prediction of snow petrel distribution and abundance in East Antarctica: comparing models at multiple scales. Ecol Model 189:105–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olivier F, Wotherspoon SJ (2006) Distribution and abundance of Wilson’s storm petrels Oceanites oceanicus at two locations in East Antarctica: testing habitat selection models. Polar Biol 29:878–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olivier F, Lee AV, Woehler EJ (2004) Distribution and abundance of snow petrels Pagodroma nivea in the Windmill Islands, East Antarctica. Polar Biol 27:257–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orgeira JL (1997a) An infrared device for finding Wilson’s storm petrel Oceanites oceanicus nests. Mar Ornithol 25:75–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Orgeira JL (1997b) Nidification y habitat del Petrel de Wilson (Oceanites oceanicus) en Puerta Cierva, Costa de Danco, Peninsula Antarctica. Ornitol Neotropical 8:49–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagano AM, Arnold TW (2009) Estimating detection probabilities of waterfowl broods from ground-based surveys. J Wildl Manag 73:686–694. doi:10.2193/2007-524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peron C, Authier M, Barbraud C, Delord K, Besson D, Weimerskirch H (2010) Interdecadal changes in at-sea distribution and abundance of subantarctic seabirds along a latitudinal gradient in the Southern Indian Ocean. Glob Change Biol 16:1895–1909. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02169.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts B (1940) The life cycle of Wilson’s Petrel Oceanites oceanicus (Kuhl). Br Graham Land Exped Sci Rep 1:141–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer JR, Peterjohn BG, Link WA (1994) Observer differences in the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Auk 111:50–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz M, Robinson S, Gales R (2005) Breeding of the Grey Petrel Procellaria cinerea on Macquarie Island: population size and nesting habitat. Emu 105:323–329. doi:10.1071/mu04058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith PA, Bart J, Lanctot RB, McCaffery BJ, Brown S (2009) Probability of detection of nests and implications for survey design. Condor 111:414–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson WL (2002) Towards reliable bird surveys: accounting for individuals present but not detected. Auk 119:18–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson PM, Ollason JC (2001) Lagged effects of ocean climate change on fulmar population dynamics. Nature 413:417–420

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Franeker JA, Bell PJ, Montague TL (1990) Birds of Ardery and Odbert Islands, Windmill Islands, Antarctica. Emu 90:74–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasilewski A (1986) Ecological aspects of the breeding cycle in the Wilson’s storm petrel, Oceanites oceanicus (Kuhl), at King George Island (South Shetland Islands, Antarctica). Polish Polar Res 7:173–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Weimerskirch H, Inchausti P, Guinet C, Barbraud C (2003) Trends in bird and seal populations as indicators of a system shift in the Southern Ocean. Antarct Sci 15:249–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White GC, Burnham KP (1999) Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Stud 46:120–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams BK, Nichols JD, Conroy MJ (2002) Analysis and management of animal populations. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to N. Morgan, I. Petty, T. Clarke, and many unnamed Mawson personnel for their participation and logistical support during surveys. This project was supported by the Australian Antarctic Division ASAC project #2722 and was carried out with approval from the Australian Antarctic Division’s Antarctic Animal Ethics Committee.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian Antarctic Division, Department of the Sustainability, Environment, Water, Populations and Communities, Channel Highway, Kingston, TAS, 7050, Australia

    D. M. Southwell, L. D. Einoder, L. M. Emmerson & C. J. Southwell

Authors
  1. D. M. Southwell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. D. Einoder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. M. Emmerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. J. Southwell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. M. Southwell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Southwell, D.M., Einoder, L.D., Emmerson, L.M. et al. Using the double-observer method to estimate detection probability of two cavity-nesting seabirds in Antarctica: the snow petrel (Pagodroma nivea) and the Wilson’s storm petrel (Oceanites oceanicus). Polar Biol 34, 1467–1474 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-011-1004-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-011-1004-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation