English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Many manuscripts comparing populations and/or analysing the structure of animal communities use indexes of captures as synonymous of abundance. However, the basic methods more suitable to this assumption - probabilistic estimates based on equal capture probability - have not been considered. In this study, the deviations caused by different types of capture indexes are compared with a common probabilistic population estimator (Cormack-Jolly-Seber). The analyses showed that Minimum Number Known Alive (MNKA) and the number of individuals showed greater association with the population estimator than with non-probabilistic indexes based on recaptures. Therefore, none of the indexes presented the same performance to estimate population size estimation which can lead to ecological misinterpretation. Some recommendations were also described.

Evaluation of abundance indexes in open population studies: a comparison in populations of small mammals in southern Brazil