Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Improving the Estimation of Calling Probability and Correction Factors in Gibbon Monitoring Using the Auditory Point Count Method

  • Published:
International Journal of Primatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Estimating the population size of primate species is very important in identifying appropriate conservation actions and measuring their effectiveness. All 17 species of gibbons recognized by the IUCN are considered threatened with extinction. Thus, there is a great need to determine and monitor their status, to conduct effective conservation interventions. Gibbons can be detected by their loud and long song bouts, and surveys usually rely on auditory point count methods. However, gibbon groups do not call daily, so we need a correction factor based on the daily calling probability to estimate gibbon population size accurately. Several studies have estimated such correction factors, but these estimates might be negatively biased if gibbon groups move beyond the maximum hearing distance or are far from the listening post and their calls are faint. We aimed to address this issue and estimate the calling probability and correction factor accurately. We collected data on southern yellow-cheeked crested gibbon (Nomascus gabriellae) in Cat Tien National Park, Vietnam, from July to October 2016, using an auditory point count method. We explored the influence of the maximum distance between the listening post and the gibbons on estimates of the calling probability, correction factor, and population size. We detected 44 gibbon groups during the survey. The calling probability and correction factor decreased with the maximum distance from the listening post to the gibbon groups. If we used all the gibbon groups to estimate the correction factor, population estimates were 15% and 18% higher than those estimated using only gibbon groups detected within 700 m and 500 m, respectively. Based on these findings, we recommend that researchers calculate the calling probability and correction factor for several maximum distances and determine the percentage overestimation of the gibbon population. They should then choose the correction factor so as to balance sample size and the risk of overestimation of gibbon population size.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • BirdLife International & Forest inventory and planning institute (2001). Sourcebook of existing and proposed protected areas in Vietnam. Hanoi: BirdLife International Vietnam Programme and the Forest Inventory and Planning Institute.

  • Brockelman, W. Y., & Ali, R. (1987). Methods of surveying and sampling forest primate populations. In C. W. Marsh & R. A. Mittermeier (Eds.), Primate conservation in the tropical rainforest (pp. 23–62). New York: Alan R. Liss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockelman, W. Y., & Srikosamatara, S. (1993). Estimation of density of gibbon groups by use of loud songs. American Journal of Primatology, 29(2), 93–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake, J. L., Borchers, D. L., & Thomas, L. (2001). Introduction to distance sampling: Estimating abundance of biological populations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. (2002). Model selection and multi-model inference: A practical information – Theoretic approach, 2nd ed. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.

  • Cheyne, S. M., Gilhooly L. J., Hamard, M. C., Höing, A., Houlihan, P. J., et al. (2016) Population mapping of gibbons in Kalimantan, Indonesia: Correlates of gibbon density and vegetation across the species range. Endangered Species Research 2016, 30, 133–143.

  • Geissmann, T. (1993). Evolution of communication in gibbons (Hylobatidae). PhD dissertation: Zürich University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geissmann, T., & Orgeldinger, M. (2000). The relationship between duet songs and pair bonds in siamangs, Hylobates syndactylus. Animal Behavior, 60, 805–809.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huggins, R. M. (1991). Some practical aspects of a conditional likelihood approach to capture experiments. Biometrics, 47, 725–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, X. L., Luo, Z. H., & Zhao, S. Y. (2006). Status and distribution patterns of black crested gibbon (Nomascus concolor jingdongensis) in Wulian Mountains, Yunnan, China: Implications for conservation. Primates, 47, 264–271.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kidney, D., Rawson, B. M., Borchers, D. L., Stevenson, B. C., Marques, T. A., & Thomas, L. (2016). An efficient acoustic density estimation method with human detectors applied to gibbons in Cambodia. PLoS One, 11. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155066.

  • O’Brien, T. G., Kinnaird, M. F., Nurcahyo, A., Iqbal, M., & Rusmanto, M. (2004). Abundance and distribution of sympatric gibbons in a threatened Sumatran rain forest. International Journal of Primatology, 25, 267–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otis, D. L., Burnham, K. P., White, G. C., & Anderson, D. R. (1978). Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations. Wildlife Monographs, 62, 1–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raemaekers, J. J., & Raemaekers, P. M. (1985). Field playback of loud calls to gibbons (Hylobates lar): Territorial, sex-specific and species-specific responses. Animal Behaviour, 33, 481–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawson, B. M. (2004). Vocalisation patterns in the yellow-cheeked crested gibbon (Nomascus gabriellae). In T. Nadler, U. Streicher, & T. L. Ha (Eds.), Conservation of primates in Vietnam (pp. 130–136). Hanoi: Haki Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichard, U. (1998). Sleeping sites, sleeping places, and presleep behavior of gibbons (Hylobates lar). American Journal of Primatology, 62, 35–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (2017). Version 2017–1. www.iucnredlist.org (accessed June 9, 2017).

  • Vu, T. T., & Dong, T. H. (2015). Estimation of northern yellow-cheeked gibbon (Nomascus annamensis) population size in Kon cha rang nature reserve: A new method–using a weighted correction factor. Vietnamese Journal of Primatology, 2, 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vu, T. T., & Rawson, B. M. (2011). Package for calculating gibbon population density from auditory surveys. Hanoi: Conservation International and Fauna & Flora International.

  • Vu, T. T., Tran, V. D., Giang, T. T., Nguyen, H. V., Nguyen, D. M., et al (2016). A mark-recapture population size estimation of southern yellow-cheeked crested gibbon Nomascus gabriellae (Thomas, 1909) in Chu Yang sin National Park, Vietnam. Asian Primate Journal, 6, 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, G. C., & Burnham, K. P. (1999). Program MARK: Survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study, 46, 120–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology (NAFOSTED) for support given to this project (Contract number 06-NN.06-2015.37). Our gratitude also extends to the forest rangers in Cat Tien National Park for permitting us to conduct the survey. We also thank all the field assistants for helping us with the field survey. Finally, we thank the reviewers and editors for their insightful comments, suggestions, and corrections.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thinh Tien Vu.

Additional information

Handling Editor: Joanna M. Setchell

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vu, T.T., Tran, L.M., Nguyen, M.D. et al. Improving the Estimation of Calling Probability and Correction Factors in Gibbon Monitoring Using the Auditory Point Count Method. Int J Primatol 39, 222–236 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-018-0030-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-018-0030-1

Keywords

Navigation