Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors01:17

Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors

146
A survey team is tasked with determining the elevation difference between points Point A and Point B, separated by uneven terrain. They use a leveling instrument and a leveling rod.Common MistakesMisreading the Rod: During a backsight reading at Point A, the instrumentman observes the rod partially obscured by tall grass. Instead of reading 1.135 m, they mistakenly record 1.735 m due to the misalignment of the crosshair with the wrong graduation. This error adds 0.600 m to all subsequent...
146
Errors and Mistakes in Surveying01:19

Errors and Mistakes in Surveying

273
Errors and mistakes in surveying refer to inaccuracies in measurements and data recording. The errors are deviations from the actual value caused by human sensory limitations, equipment flaws, or environmental effects. These errors are typically unintentional and can result from the inherent imperfections in the instruments used, atmospheric conditions, or the observer’s inability to perceive exact measurements. On the other hand, mistakes are caused by the surveyor's lack of...
273
Errors in Taping01:18

Errors in Taping

105
Errors in taping arise from multiple factors that can significantly impact measurement accuracy in surveying. Misalignment of the tape, often due to human error, is one primary source. A skilled rear tapeman, using a telescope, can help correct alignment by guiding the head tapeman; however, human limitations still lead to small inaccuracies. These errors may include misplacement of pins or inaccurate tape readings due to common visual confusions, such as mistaking a six for a nine. Such...
105
Adjusting a Traverse01:12

Adjusting a Traverse

113
In the site survey of a four-sided traverse, internal angles are essential to ensure geometric accuracy. The survey revealed that the sum of the measured internal angles was 359 degrees and 48 minutes, which is 12 minutes less than the expected 360 degrees. This discrepancy signals an error likely arising from measurement inaccuracies during the fieldwork.To rectify this error, the adjustment process involved distributing the 12-minute shortfall equally across the four internal angles. By...
113
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

3.2K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
3.2K
Design Example: Identifying the Locations of Monuments in the Field Using Global Positioning System Device01:30

Design Example: Identifying the Locations of Monuments in the Field Using Global Positioning System Device

186
Surveyors use Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to measure the precise location and elevation of points on Earth. In a recent survey, GPS receivers were used to determine the coordinates and elevations of two park monuments. The process involved careful mission planning, data collection, and correction to ensure accuracy. The survey began with mission planning to identify optimal satellite visibility and minimize Position Dilution of Precision (PDOP). A geodetic control point...
186

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Ontogenetic shifts in wood anatomy and leaf traits in tropical dry forests.

The New phytologist·2025
Same author

Revealing species responses to environmental change through long-term data and mechanistic frameworks.

The Journal of animal ecology·2025
Same author

Three decades of declines restructure butterfly communities in the Midwestern United States.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2025
Same author

Evaluating environmental drivers and synchrony of Arctic shorebird demographic rates to inform conservation management.

Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America·2025
Same author

Why statistical innovations?

Ecology·2025
Same author

Rapid butterfly declines across the United States during the 21st century.

Science (New York, N.Y.)·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 28, 2025

Cereal Crop Ear Counting in Field Conditions Using Zenithal RGB Images
11:49

Cereal Crop Ear Counting in Field Conditions Using Zenithal RGB Images

Published on: February 2, 2019

9.4K

Errors in aerial survey count data: Identifying pitfalls and solutions.

Kayla L Davis1,2, Emily D Silverman3, Allison L Sussman4

  • 1Department of Integrative Biology Michigan State University East Lansing Michigan USA.

Ecology and Evolution
|March 28, 2022
PubMed
Summary

Accurate wildlife abundance estimates rely on reliable aerial surveys. This study reviews common data issues like nondetection, counting errors, and misidentification, offering solutions for better ecological management.

Keywords:
abundanceaerial surveycount datacounting errorimperfect detectionnondetectionspecies misidentificationstudy design

More Related Videos

Measuring and Mapping Patterns of Soil Erosion and Deposition Related to Soil Carbonate Concentrations Under Agricultural Management
08:09

Measuring and Mapping Patterns of Soil Erosion and Deposition Related to Soil Carbonate Concentrations Under Agricultural Management

Published on: September 12, 2017

11.9K
Measuring the Structure, Composition, and Change of Underwater Environments with Large-area Imaging
09:19

Measuring the Structure, Composition, and Change of Underwater Environments with Large-area Imaging

Published on: April 18, 2025

864

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 28, 2025

Cereal Crop Ear Counting in Field Conditions Using Zenithal RGB Images
11:49

Cereal Crop Ear Counting in Field Conditions Using Zenithal RGB Images

Published on: February 2, 2019

9.4K
Measuring and Mapping Patterns of Soil Erosion and Deposition Related to Soil Carbonate Concentrations Under Agricultural Management
08:09

Measuring and Mapping Patterns of Soil Erosion and Deposition Related to Soil Carbonate Concentrations Under Agricultural Management

Published on: September 12, 2017

11.9K
Measuring the Structure, Composition, and Change of Underwater Environments with Large-area Imaging
09:19

Measuring the Structure, Composition, and Change of Underwater Environments with Large-area Imaging

Published on: April 18, 2025

864

Area of Science:

  • Ecology
  • Wildlife Management
  • Conservation Biology

Background:

  • Accurate animal abundance estimates are crucial for effective wildlife management.
  • Aerial surveys are efficient for collecting data over large areas but can yield unreliable results.
  • Despite extensive use, common problems in aerial survey data remain inadequately resolved.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate common problems in aerial survey data (nondetection, counting error, misidentification) over the last 50 years.
  • To explore the extent of these challenges and potential resolutions using a case study and an online quiz.
  • To synthesize strategies for overcoming challenges in aerial survey data for wildlife abundance estimation.

Main Methods:

  • Extensive literature review of aerial survey methodology over 50 years.
  • Double-observer case study using waterbird data from aerial surveys.
  • Online group (flock) counting quiz to assess counting errors.

Main Results:

  • Nearly three-quarters of the literature focused on nondetection errors; counting error and misidentification were less addressed.
  • Case study demonstrated the extent and magnitude of potential errors in aerial survey data.
  • Online quiz revealed that aerial observers tend to undercount group sizes, with errors increasing with group size.

Conclusions:

  • Nondetection, counting error, and misidentification can bias wildlife abundance inferences from aerial surveys.
  • Addressing these issues requires careful consideration during survey design and data analysis.
  • Strategies like digital data collection and ordinal modeling can mitigate errors and improve data reliability.