Joint analysis of structured and semi-structured community science data improves precision of relative abundance but not trends in birds

• Published in: Scientific reports Vol. 12; no. 1; p. 20289
• Main Authors: Schindler, Alexander R., Cunningham, Stephanie A., Schafer, Toryn L. J., Sinnott, Emily A., Clements, Sarah J., DiDonato, Frances M., Mosloff, Alisha R., Walters, Clay M., Shipley, Amy A., Weegman, Mitch D., Zhao, Qing
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 24.11.2022; Nature Publishing Group; Nature Portfolio
• Subjects: 631/158; 631/158/1144; 631/158/1745; 631/158/672; 704/158; Animal breeding; Animals; Birds; Citizen Science; Data Collection; Estimates; Humanities and Social Sciences; Life history; multidisciplinary; Polls & surveys; Population Density; Population Dynamics; Relative abundance; Science; Science (multidisciplinary); Surveys; Trends; Wildlife
• ISSN: 2045-2322; 2045-2322
• DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-23603-0

Estimating absolute and relative abundance of wildlife populations is critical to addressing ecological questions and conservation needs, yet obtaining reliable estimates can be challenging because surveys are often limited spatially or temporally. Community science (i.e., citizen science) provides opportunities for semi-structured data collected by the public (e.g., eBird) to improve capacity of relative abundance estimation by complementing structured survey data collected by trained observers (e.g., North American breeding bird survey [BBS]). We developed two state-space models to estimate relative abundance and population trends: one using BBS data and the other jointly analyzing BBS and eBird data. We applied these models to seven bird species with diverse life history characteristics. Joint analysis of eBird and BBS data improved precision of mean and year-specific relative abundance estimates for all species, but the BBS-only model produced more precise trend estimates compared to the joint model for most species. The relative abundance estimates of the joint model were particularly more precise than the BBS-only estimates in areas where species detectability was low resulting from either low BBS survey effort or low abundance. These results suggest that community science data can be a valuable resource for cost-effective improvement in wildlife abundance estimation.