rdf-syntax-grammar
mods:
  schema location: http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-2.xsd
  title info:
    title: Estimating density of Florida Key deer
  name:
    name part: Roberts, Clay Walton
    name part: 1973-
    role:
      role term: creator
  name:
    name part: Lopez, Roel R.
    role:
      role term: thesis advisor.
  type of resource: text
  genre: bibliography
  origin info:
    place:
      place term: txu
    date issued: 2006
    issuance: monographic
  language:
    language term: eng
  physical description:
    form: electronic
    form: remote
  abstract: Florida Key deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) were listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 1967. A variety of survey methods have been used in estimating deer density and/or changes in population trends for this species since 1968; however, a need to evaluate the precision of existing and alternative survey methods (i.e., road counts, mark-recapture, infrared-triggered cameras [ITC]) was desired by USFWS. I evaluated density estimates from unbaited ITCs and road surveys. Road surveys (n = 253) were conducted along a standardized 4-km route each week betweenJanuary 1999- December 2000 (total deer observed, n = 4,078). During this same period,11 ITC stations (1 camera/42 ha) collected 5,511 deer exposures. Study results found a difference (P < 0.001) between methods with road survey estimates lower (76 deer) than ITC estimates (166 deer). Comparing the proportion of marked deer, I observed a higher (P < 0.001) proportion from road surveys (0.266) than from ITC estimates (0.146). Lower road survey estimates are attributed to (1) urban deer behavior resulting in a high proportion of marked deer observations, and (2) inadequate sample area coverage. I suggest that ITC estimates are a reliable and precise alternative to road surveys for estimating Key deer densities on outer islands. I also evaluated density estimates from 3 road survey methods. Road survey methods (n = 100) were conducted along a standardized 31-km route where mark resight, strip-transect, and distance sampling data were collected between June 2003- May 2004. I found mark-resight estimates to be lower ( x̄ = 384, 95% CI = 346-421) than strip-transect estimates ( x̄ = 854, 95% CI = 806-902) and distance estimates ( x̄ =523, 95% CI = 488-557). I attribute low mark-resight estimates to urban deer behavior resulting in a higher proportion of marked deer observations along roadways. Highstrip-transect estimates also are attributed to urban deer behavior and a reduced effectiv…
  note: by Clay Walton Roberts.
  note: "Major Subject: Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences"
  note: Title from author supplied metadata (automated record created on Sep. 15, 2006.)
  note: Vita.
  note: Abstract.
  note: Electronic resource.
  note: Mode of access: World Wide Web.
  note: System requirements: World Wide Web access and Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  note: M. S. Texas A&M University 2005.
  note: Includes bibliographical references.
  note: Text (Thesis).
  subject:
    topic: Major wildlife and fisheries sciences
  subject:
    topic: Key Deer
  subject:
    topic: Density
  identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/3812
  record info:
    record content source: TXA
    record creation date: 070131
    record change date: 20151104135310.0
    record identifier: in00002133260