Literature DB >> 22443152

Assessing citizen contributions to butterfly monitoring in two large cities.

K C Matteson1, D J Taron, E S Minor.   

Abstract

Citizen science may be especially effective in urban landscapes due to the large pool of potential volunteers. However, there have been few evaluations of the contributions of citizen scientists to knowledge of biological communities in and around cities. To assess the effectiveness of citizen scientists' monitoring of species in urban areas, we compared butterfly data collected over 10 years in Chicago, Illinois (U.S.A.), and New York City, New York (U.S.A.). The dates, locations, and methods of data collection in Chicago were standardized, whereas data from New York were collected at any location at any time. For each city, we evaluated whether the number of observers, observation days (days on which observations were reported), and sampling locations were associated with the reported proportion of the estimated regional pool of butterfly species. We also compared the number of volunteers, duration of volunteer involvement, and consistency of sampling efforts at individual locations within each city over time. From 2001 to 2010, there were 73 volunteers in Chicago and 89 in New York. During this period, volunteers observed 86% and 89% of the estimated number of butterfly species present in Chicago and New York, respectively. Volunteers in New York reported a greater proportion of the estimated pool of butterfly species per year. In addition, more species were observed per volunteer and observation day in New York, largely due to the unrestricted sampling season in New York. Chicago volunteers were active for more years and monitored individual locations more consistently over time than volunteers in New York. Differences in monitoring protocol--especially length of sampling season and selection protocol for monitoring locations--influenced the relationship between species accrual and sampling effort, which suggests these factors are important in volunteer-based species-monitoring programs. ©2012 Society for Conservation Biology.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22443152     DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01825.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  3 in total

1.  Quality of non-expert citizen science data collected for habitat type conservation status assessment in Natura 2000 protected areas.

Authors:  A S Kallimanis; M Panitsa; P Dimopoulos
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  EchidnaCSI: Engaging the public in research and conservation of the short-beaked echidna.

Authors:  Tahlia Perry; Alan Stenhouse; Isabella Wilson; Imma Perfetto; Michael W McKelvey; Michelle Coulson; Rachel A Ankeny; Peggy D Rismiller; Frank Grützner
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 12.779

Review 3.  Citizen Science and the Urban Ecology of Birds and Butterflies - A Systematic Review.

Authors:  James Wang Wei; Benjamin P Y-H Lee; Low Bing Wen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-10       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.