Limitations of the Double-Observer Method for Estimating Population Size: A Case Study on the Southern Greater Glider (Petauroides volans)

Monitoring the size of wildlife populations is crucial for the effective implementation of conservation management strategies, and a variety of methods have been developed for this purpose. One such approach is the double-observer method, which has recently gained prominence in monitoring programs for the southern greater glider (Petauroides volans), an iconic nocturnal arboreal marsupial native to Australia. While this method has been successfully applied at lower population densities, its reliability and applicability at higher-density sites has not been evaluated. This case study represents the first instance of an investigation and discussion on the application of the double-observer method in greater glider monitoring at higher-density sites. We found that in higher-density areas, the proximity of individuals makes it more difficult to reliably distinguish unique (individual) animals between observers, and the increased number of observations per transect extends the time required for data recording. Transects with more animal observations showed significantly longer delays between observers (z = 5.062, p < 0.001). Additionally, discrepancies in the number of animal observations between observers significantly altered the intended 15–20 min interval (z = 2.71, p = 0.007). Deviations from the standard 15–20 min interval between observers were common, occurring at 44 of the 66 sites, where actual time-lags ranged from 0 to 64 min. Consequently, longer intervals increased the potential for animal movement, while shorter intervals risked observer independence. These factors, combined with our experience applying the double-observer method across sites with markedly different greater glider densities, suggest that the critical non-movement assumption may be violated more frequently than previously recognised. We discuss the limitations of applying the double-observer method to survey high-density populations and recommend prioritising research on greater glider movement patterns and alternative survey techniques to improve the accuracy and reliability of monitoring programs at higher-density sites.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conservation
Published
2026-01-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/conservation6010012
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Limitations of the Double-Observer Method for Estimating Population Size: A Case Study on the Southern Greater Glider (Petauroides volans)

Ana Gračanin, Kara N. Youngentob, David B. Lindenmayer, Xander Kremer
Conservation
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
article

Limitations of the Double-Observer Method for Estimating Population Size: A Case Study on the Southern Greater Glider (Petauroides volans)

Ana Gračanin, Kara N. Youngentob, David B. Lindenmayer, Xander Kremer
article en

Abstract

Monitoring the size of wildlife populations is crucial for the effective implementation of conservation management strategies, and a variety of methods have been developed for this purpose. One such approach is the double-observer method, which has recently gained prominence in monitoring programs for the southern greater glider (Petauroides volans), an iconic nocturnal arboreal marsupial native to Australia. While this method has been successfully applied at lower population densities, its reliability and applicability at higher-density sites has not been evaluated. This case study represents the first instance of an investigation and discussion on the application of the double-observer method in greater glider monitoring at higher-density sites. We found that in higher-density areas, the proximity of individuals makes it more difficult to reliably distinguish unique (individual) animals between observers, and the increased number of observations per transect extends the time required for data recording. Transects with more animal observations showed significantly longer delays between observers (z = 5.062, p < 0.001). Additionally, discrepancies in the number of animal observations between observers significantly altered the intended 15–20 min interval (z = 2.71, p = 0.007). Deviations from the standard 15–20 min interval between observers were common, occurring at 44 of the 66 sites, where actual time-lags ranged from 0 to 64 min. Consequently, longer intervals increased the potential for animal movement, while shorter intervals risked observer independence. These factors, combined with our experience applying the double-observer method across sites with markedly different greater glider densities, suggest that the critical non-movement assumption may be violated more frequently than previously recognised. We discuss the limitations of applying the double-observer method to survey high-density populations and recommend prioritising research on greater glider movement patterns and alternative survey techniques to improve the accuracy and reliability of monitoring programs at higher-density sites.

ConservationVol. 6(1)
Australian National University (AU)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 87%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
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.