Methods to account for incomplete viewsheds in distance sampling

Abstract Conventional distance sampling is a logistically feasible method for estimating densities of unmarked animals. The probability density function (PDF) of the sampling area specifies the expected proportion of the population that occurs at each distance from the observer and is a fundamental component of distance sampling models. Current approaches set this PDF either to equal probability at each distance, for line transects, or an increasing probability for point transects (because sampling area increases with radial distance from a point). Geographic Information Systems allow measurements of the area viewable from a given location (i.e. the viewshed), the structure of which may not reflect theoretical PDFs for either line (rectangular) or point (circular) transects. We simulated three datasets to test how variation in the viewshed structure affects estimates of detection probability, abundance, and density. We then implemented a novel application of Bayesian distance sampling models to test the magnitude of parameter bias recovered by accounting for incomplete viewsheds. Lastly, we compared parameter estimates from Bayesian hierarchical models that used either traditional or custom PDFs to analyse a dataset of 95 county‐level spotlight surveys of white‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) in Iowa, USA. For empirical data, viewable sampling area decreased with distance at an average rate of 3% every 100 m (range from 1% to 7% among counties). Our model correction decreased county‐level density estimates by an average of 18% (range from 13% to 27% among counties), which depended on how sharply visibility declined. We suggest incomplete viewsheds be handled by considering the expected distribution of animals inside and outside of the viewshed. More generally, we show that customizing a PDF to more accurately reflect the study system improves density estimates and offers flexibility when the distribution of animals from the observer deviates from traditional assumptions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Published
2025-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.70038
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.15
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Methods to account for incomplete viewsheds in distance sampling

Stephen J. Dinsmore, Jace R. Elliott, Jonathan P. Harris, Tyler M. Harms et al.
3 citations
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
5.15
article

Methods to account for incomplete viewsheds in distance sampling

Stephen J. Dinsmore, Jace R. Elliott, Jonathan P. Harris, Tyler M. Harms, Dan J. Kaminski, David M. Delaney
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract Conventional distance sampling is a logistically feasible method for estimating densities of unmarked animals. The probability density function (PDF) of the sampling area specifies the expected proportion of the population that occurs at each distance from the observer and is a fundamental component of distance sampling models. Current approaches set this PDF either to equal probability at each distance, for line transects, or an increasing probability for point transects (because sampling area increases with radial distance from a point). Geographic Information Systems allow measurements of the area viewable from a given location (i.e. the viewshed), the structure of which may not reflect theoretical PDFs for either line (rectangular) or point (circular) transects. We simulated three datasets to test how variation in the viewshed structure affects estimates of detection probability, abundance, and density. We then implemented a novel application of Bayesian distance sampling models to test the magnitude of parameter bias recovered by accounting for incomplete viewsheds. Lastly, we compared parameter estimates from Bayesian hierarchical models that used either traditional or custom PDFs to analyse a dataset of 95 county‐level spotlight surveys of white‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) in Iowa, USA. For empirical data, viewable sampling area decreased with distance at an average rate of 3% every 100 m (range from 1% to 7% among counties). Our model correction decreased county‐level density estimates by an average of 18% (range from 13% to 27% among counties), which depended on how sharply visibility declined. We suggest incomplete viewsheds be handled by considering the expected distribution of animals inside and outside of the viewshed. More generally, we show that customizing a PDF to more accurately reflect the study system improves density estimates and offers flexibility when the distribution of animals from the observer deviates from traditional assumptions.

Methods in Ecology and EvolutionVol. 16(6)
Iowa State University (US), Iowa Department of Natural Resources (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
5.15
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.