TY - JOUR
T1 - Estimating distance sampling detection functions when distances are measured with errors
AU - Borchers, David
AU - Marques, Tiago
AU - Gunnlaugsson, Thorvaldur
AU - Jupp, Peter
PY - 2010/9
Y1 - 2010/9
N2 - Distance sampling methods assume that distances are known but in practice there are often errors in measuring them. These can have substantial impact on the bias and precision of distance sampling estimators. In this paper we develop methods that accommodate both systematic and stochastic measurement errors. We use the methods to estimate detection probability in two surveys with substantial measurement error. The first is a shipboard line transect survey in the North Sea in which information on measurement error comes from photographically measured distances to a subset of detections. The second is an aerial cue-counting survey off Iceland in which information on measurement error comes from pairs of independently estimated distances to a subset of detections. Different methods are required for measurement error estimation in the two cases. We investigate by simulation the properties of the new estimators and compare them to conventional estimators. They are found to perform better than conventional estimators in the presence of measurement error, more so in the case of cue-counting and point transect estimators than line transect estimators. An appendix on the asymptotic distributions of conditional and full likelihood estimators is available online.
AB - Distance sampling methods assume that distances are known but in practice there are often errors in measuring them. These can have substantial impact on the bias and precision of distance sampling estimators. In this paper we develop methods that accommodate both systematic and stochastic measurement errors. We use the methods to estimate detection probability in two surveys with substantial measurement error. The first is a shipboard line transect survey in the North Sea in which information on measurement error comes from photographically measured distances to a subset of detections. The second is an aerial cue-counting survey off Iceland in which information on measurement error comes from pairs of independently estimated distances to a subset of detections. Different methods are required for measurement error estimation in the two cases. We investigate by simulation the properties of the new estimators and compare them to conventional estimators. They are found to perform better than conventional estimators in the presence of measurement error, more so in the case of cue-counting and point transect estimators than line transect estimators. An appendix on the asymptotic distributions of conditional and full likelihood estimators is available online.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77949559081&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s13253-010-0021-y
DO - 10.1007/s13253-010-0021-y
M3 - Article
SN - 1085-7117
VL - 15
SP - 346
EP - 361
JO - Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics
JF - Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics
IS - 3
ER -