Evaluation of methods and data quality from a volunteer-based amphibian call survey

By Kristen S. Genet, Lori G. Sargent. 2003

114 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f27c5dcbfa29646f2aab2b66d04b2b310fa985de

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. A. Valentini
2. Tony Dejean
3. P. Taberlet
4. B. R. Schmidt
5. E. Bellemain
6. C. Miquel
7. M. Dorcas
8. C. Miaud

Citations in the corpus

• Monitoring distributions using call surveys: estimating site occupancy, detection probabilities and inferring absence. (2005, background): “However, Genet and Sargent (2003) found that volunteers falsely recorded species at sites where they were not present.”
• Participatory forest monitoring: an assessment of the accuracy of simple cost–effective methods (2008, result): “It has been argued that the involvement of local community members in biodiversity monitoring may compromise data accuracy and increase biases beyond acceptable levels in comparison with data collected by educated biologists (Rodgers 1993; Firehock and West 1995; Brandon et al. 2003; Genet and Sarge”
• Effect of sampling effort and species detectability on volunteer based anuran monitoring programs (2005, background): “Previous work has shown that volunteer observers generally correctly identify species by their call (Genet and Sargent, 2003; Shirose et al., 1997).”
• Improving and integrating data on invasive species collected by citizen scientists (2010, background): “…studies that show an increase in variability among data collected by citizen scientists compared to experts (Ericsson and Wallin 1999; Barrett et al. 2002; Genet and Sargent 2003) and the use of simplistic protocols that do not yield useful data (Ericsson and Wallin 1999; Engel and Voshell 2002).”
• Anuran Calling Survey Optimization: Developing and Testing Predictive Models of Anuran Calling Activity (2010, background): “Although monitoring programs aim to sample during peak calling times, survey success has varied because of imperfect detection (Genet and Sargent, 2003; Weir et al., 2003).”
• Improved detection of an alien invasive species through environmental DNA barcoding: the example of the American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus (2012, background): “…occurrence or abundance strongly depends on species detectability, which vary with many factors; these include the date and time of day, meteorological conditions, population size and observer experience (Crouch & Paton 2002; Genet & Sargent 2003; Schmidt & Pellet 2010; Tanadini & Schmidt 2011).”
• Citizen Science as a Tool for Augmenting Museum Collection Data from Urban Areas (2017, background): “For example, a number of citizenscience studies have used frog call surveys to successfully monitor frog populations (Genet and Sargent, 2003; de Solla et al., 2005; Lotz and Allen, 2007).”
• Auditory monitoring of anuran populations (2009, background): “However, studies by Genet and Sargent (2003), Shirose et al.”
• Data reliability in citizen science: learning curve and the effects of training method, volunteer background and experience on identification accuracy of insects visiting ivy flowers (2016, background): “…et al. 2008), marine (Foster-Smith & Evans 2003) and freshwater invertebrates (Fore, Paulsen & O’Laughlin 2001; Engel & Voshell 2002), amphibians (Genet & Sargent 2003), small mammals (Newman, Buesching & Macdonald 2003), birds (Greenwood 2007; Jackson, Gergel & Martin 2015), coccinellid…”