Second Guessing the Maximum Likelihood Estimator Values for Bat Surveys

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorFord. W. Marken
dc.contributor.authorDe La Cruz, Jesse L.en
dc.contributor.authorThorne, Emily D.en
dc.contributor.authorSilvis, Alexanderen
dc.contributor.authorArmstrong, Michael P.en
dc.contributor.authorKing, R. Andrewen
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-04T17:19:57Zen
dc.date.available2024-06-04T17:19:57Zen
dc.date.issued2024en
dc.description.abstractThe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allows acoustical surveys and automated identification software to determine the presence of the endangered northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis). Analytical software is required to assess presence probability on a site-night basis using a maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) that accounts for interspecific bat misclassification rates. The current standard for occupancy is a returned MLE P-value < 0.05 at the nightly level irrespective of the number of files identified as either northern long-eared bats or Indiana bats. These MLE P-values can vary based on presence of other bat species with similar calls and the relative proportions of all species recorded. Accordingly, there is concern that with few nightly northern long-eared bat or Indiana bat recordings or the presence of large numbers of high frequency bats, false-negative findings from a swamping effect could result. Using data collected in 2020–2021 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to set nationwide acoustic monitoring guidelines, we examined the relationship of returned software MLE P-values from 4873 site-nights of acoustic detector data relative to nightly counts of northern long-eared bats and Indiana bats, overall counts of other high-frequency bats, and habitat cover type. For both northern long-eared bats and Indiana bats, nights with one or more echolocation pass files identified as either species but above the MLE P-value threshold largely occurred where nightly counts of the target species was <15 and their proportion to the count of high-frequency bat species was low. We followed this analysis with a simulation using a known call library and observed similar patterns. Accordingly, with few nightly echolocation passes, post-hoc visual assessment following automated software identification easily could be undertaken. Evidence of swamping by other high-frequency species causing positive file identification creating false-negative or false-positives of northern long-eared bats and Indiana bats was not apparent at nightly counts of either species > 10.en
dc.description.versionPublished versionen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier.otherhttps://seafwa.org/journal/2024/second-guessing-maximum-likelihood-estimator-values-bat-surveysen
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10919/119251en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en
dc.titleSecond Guessing the Maximum Likelihood Estimator Values for Bat Surveysen
dc.title.serialJournal of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agenciesen
dc.typeArticle - Refereeden
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Ford et al. - 2024 - Second guessing the maximum likelihood estimator values for bat surveys(2).pdf
Size:
701.03 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.5 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Scholarly Works, Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Scholarly Works, Conservation Management Institute