Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Cost-effectiveness of two monitoring strategies for the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus)

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Amphibia-Reptilia

Designing cost-effective monitoring protocols is a fundamental prerequisite for amphibian conservation. Here, we report a comparison of flashlight survey and trapping (with and without light sticks as trap baits) in order to determine flashlight detectability and trap detectability of great crested newts (Triturus cristatus). Twelve ponds were surveyed in Switzerland where T. cristatus had been known to occur. We measured covariates affecting both flashlight detectability and trap detectability. Newt flashlight detectability using 20 min long flashlight surveys was on average ± SE = 39% ± 10%). Flashlight detectability was mostly influenced by surface and submerged vegetation density, as well as by water temperature. Newt trap detectability during one night using six funnel traps per pond was on average±SE = 41%±10%. Trap detectability was mainly affected by trap position in the pond, with traps lying on the pond floor being more likely to attract newts. The use of light sticks did not enhance the trap detectability. Estimates of flashlight detectability and trap detectability were used to define how many times the sites have to be visited to be 95% certain of not missing T. cristatus in ponds where they are present. In both cases multiple visits (7 flashlight surveys or 6 trapping sessions) have to be performed. Flashlight surveys are the most easily applied and most cost-effective method to use in large scale programs.

Affiliations: 1: Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Division of Conservation Biology, Balzerstrasse 6, University of Bern, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland; 2: Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Division of Conservation Biology, Balzerstrasse 6, University of Bern, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland, A. Maibach Sàrl, Ch. de la Poya 10, CP 99, CH-1610 Oron-la-Ville, Switzerland, KARCH, Passage Maximilien-de-Meuron 6, CH-2000 Neuchâtel, Switzerland;, Email: jerome.pellet@amaibach.ch

Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/156853810791769374
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/156853810791769374
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/156853810791769374
2010-07-01
2016-12-03

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Amphibia-Reptilia — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation