...
首页> 外文期刊>Wildlife Research >Efficacy of hair-sampling techniques for the detection of medium-sized terrestrial mammals. I. A comparison between hair-funnels, hair-tubes and indirect signs
【24h】

Efficacy of hair-sampling techniques for the detection of medium-sized terrestrial mammals. I. A comparison between hair-funnels, hair-tubes and indirect signs

机译:毛发采样技术对中型陆生哺乳动物检测的功效。 I.漏斗,发管和间接标志之间的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

We compared the efficacy of two different designs of hair-tube for detecting medium-sized, terrestrial marsupials in a range of forest types in south-east New South Wales. The two designs compared were a large-diameter PVC pipe (large hair-tube) and a tapered hair-funnel. In addition, the relative abundance of forage-diggings of the same marsupials was estimated simultaneously in order to provide an independent assessment of their distribution within the same study area. Only two hair-tubes out of 620 contained hair that could be attributed to the target fauna, both from the long-nosed bandicoot (Perameles nasuta). This was despite the widespread occurrence of forage-diggings at all of the 31 transects that were surveyed. Only two species of mammal, the agile antechinus (Antechinus agilis) and the bush rat (Rattus fuscipes), were detected in sufficient quantity to enable statistical analysis comparing the efficacy of the two hair-tube types. For R. fuscipes the large hair-tube was significantly more effective than the hair-funnel. Conversely, the hair-funnel was significantly more effective in detecting A. agilis than the large hair-tube. Our results suggest that both designs of hair-tube, in their current form, are ineffective for surveying for medium-sized terrestrial marsupials. We see three important issues regarding hair-tube design and implementation that require more attention before this technique can be considered an effective surveying tool: hair-tube morphology, the material used to capture hair, and bait type.
机译:我们比较了两种不同设计的毛管在新南威尔士州东南部各种森林类型中检测中型陆地有袋动物的功效。比较的两种设计是大直径PVC管(大发管)和锥形漏斗。此外,同时估算了同一有袋动物的觅食相对数量,以便对它们在同一研究区域内的分布情况进行独立评估。 620只中的两根毛发管包含可能归因于目标动物的毛发,均来自长鼻band(Perameles nasuta)。尽管在调查的所有31个样面中普遍发生了觅食挖掘活动。仅检测到了足够数量的两种哺乳动物,即敏捷的前羊((Antechinus agilis)和丛林鼠(Rattus fuscipes),以进行统计分析,从而比较了两种发管的功效。对于R. fuscipes,大发管比发漏斗更有效。相反,与大型发管相比,漏斗在检测敏捷灵芝时显着更有效。我们的结果表明,两种形式的发管,以目前的形式,对于中型陆地有袋动物的调查均无效。我们看到有关发管设计和实施的三个重要问题,在此技术被认为是有效的测量工具之前,需要更多的关注:发管形态,捕获头发的材料和诱饵类型。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Wildlife Research》 |2002年第4期|p.379-387|共9页
  • 作者单位

    AThreatened Species Unit, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service,Queanbeyan, NSW 2620, Australia.BC/- Post Office, Wyndham, NSW 2550, Australia.CBureau of Resource Sciences, GPO Box 858, ACT 2600, Australia.;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号