Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repositorio.ufjf.br/jspui/handle/ufjf/7399
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Humpback whale megaptera novaeangliae cetartiodactyla.pdf821.56 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.creatorBortolotto, Guilherme A.-
dc.creatorDanilewicz, Daniel-
dc.creatorAndriolo, Artur-
dc.creatorZerbini, Alexandre N.-
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-10T19:24:21Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-10-
dc.date.available2018-09-10T19:24:21Z-
dc.date.issued2016-05-
dc.citation.volume33pt_BR
dc.citation.issue2pt_BR
dc.citation.spage1pt_BR
dc.citation.epage5pt_BR
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1984-4689zool-20150133pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.ufjf.br/jspui/handle/ufjf/7399-
dc.description.abstractAccurate estimates of group sizes through line transect sampling methods are important to correctly ascertain the abundance of animals that occur in groups. Since the average observed group size is a component of the distance sampling formula, bias in these data leads to biased abundance estimates. This study aimed to evaluate the potential errors in group size estimation during line transect ship surveys to estimate abundances of the humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae (Borowski 1781). In a research cruise along the Brazilian coast, an experiment to collect group size information was conducted from two different sighting platforms on the same vessel. Group sizes were recorded by primary observers at first sighting (PO1) and, in some cases, after some time (PO2). A tracker (T) was located on a higher platform to estimate the sizes of groups detected by the primary observers, but tracked one group at a time until it passed abeam. Thus, the dedicated effort to obtain multiple group counts (i.e. higher platform, more time and no responsibility for detecting new groups) was expected to provide more accurate numbers. PO2 estimates were compared with PO1 estimates, and T estimates were compared with both PO1 and PO2. Additionally, ratios between T and both PO2 (R1) and PO1 (R2), and between PO2 and PO1 (R3) were calculated. To investigate a possible improvement in abundance estimates, a correction factor (CF) was computed from the ratio of T and PO2 means. Primary observer self-correction (= 1.60, CV% = 70.3) was statistically similar to the correction for the tracker (= 1.62, CV% = 84.1). CF resulted in 1 and would not improve abundance estimates. This study supports that observers conducting line transect surveys on large whales have the potential to provide group size information that is as adequate as the correction procedure adopted.pt_BR
dc.description.resumo-pt_BR
dc.languageengpt_BR
dc.publisher-pt_BR
dc.publisher.countryBrasilpt_BR
dc.publisher.initials-pt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofZoologia (Curitiba)pt_BR
dc.rightsAcesso Abertopt_BR
dc.subjectAbundancept_BR
dc.subjectBiaspt_BR
dc.subjectConservationpt_BR
dc.subjectDistance samplingpt_BR
dc.subjectMysticetuspt_BR
dc.subject.cnpq-pt_BR
dc.titleHumpback whale megaptera novaeangliae (cetartiodactyla: balaenopteridae) group sizes in line transect ship surveys: an evaluation of observer errorspt_BR
dc.typeArtigo de Periódicopt_BR
Appears in Collections:Artigos de Periódicos



Items in DSpace are protected by Creative Commons licenses, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.