Antarctic Penguin Biogeography Project: Database of abundance and distribution for the Adélie, chinstrap, gentoo, emperor, macaroni, and king penguin south of 60 S

Registros

Los datos en este recurso de evento de muestreo han sido publicados como Archivo Darwin Core(DwC-A), el cual es un formato estándar para compartir datos de biodiversidad como un conjunto de una o más tablas de datos. La tabla de datos del core contiene 4.055 registros.

también existen 2 tablas de datos de extensiones. Un registro en una extensión provee información adicional sobre un registro en el core. El número de registros en cada tabla de datos de la extensión se ilustra a continuación.

Este IPT archiva los datos y, por lo tanto, sirve como repositorio de datos. Los datos y los metadatos del recurso están disponibles para su descarga en la sección descargas. La tabla versiones enumera otras versiones del recurso que se han puesto a disposición del público y permite seguir los cambios realizados en el recurso a lo largo del tiempo.

Versiones

La siguiente tabla muestra sólo las versiones publicadas del recurso que son de acceso público.

¿Cómo referenciar?

Los usuarios deben citar este trabajo de la siguiente manera:

Che-Castaldo C, Humphries G, Lynch H, Van de Putte A (2023). Antarctic Penguin Biogeography Project: Database of abundance and distribution for the Adélie, chinstrap, gentoo, emperor, macaroni, and king penguin south of 60 S. Version 2.3. SCAR - AntOBIS. Samplingevent dataset. https://doi.org/10.48361/zftxkr

Derechos

Los usuarios deben respetar los siguientes derechos de uso:

El publicador y propietario de los derechos de este trabajo es SCAR - AntOBIS. Esta obra está bajo una licencia Creative Commons de Atribución/Reconocimiento (CC-BY 4.0).

Registro GBIF

Este recurso ha sido registrado en GBIF con el siguiente UUID: f7c30fac-cf80-471f-8343-4ec5d8594661.  SCAR - AntOBIS publica este recurso y está registrado en GBIF como un publicador de datos avalado por Ocean Biodiversity Information System.

Palabras clave

Samplingevent; OCEAN; SOUTHERN OCEAN; ANTARCTICA; BIRDS; PENGUINS; POPULATION ABUNDANCE; BIOGEOGRAPHY

Contactos

Cobertura geográfica

Penguin breeding colonies located at or very near sea level distributed around the Antarctic continent and along the Antarctic Peninsula as well as on outlying islands in the Southern Ocean.

Cobertura taxonómica

No hay descripción disponible

Cobertura temporal

Datos del proyecto

The objective of this project is to compile all available data on the distribution and abundance of Antarctic penguins, and to make that data available for the scientific and management communities.

Personas asociadas al proyecto:

Métodos de muestreo

This database includes all known records of penguin breeding abundance and distribution south of 60 S. Data sources include peer reviewed scientific manuscripts, expedition reports and other public datasets outside the scientific literature, management and policy documents, and private communications. Abundance estimates are derived primarily from direct ground counting, imagery collected by remotely-piloted aircraft systems, and satellite imagery. Additional data types include counts from aerial, ground, or vessel-based photographs.

Descripción de la metodología paso a paso:

1. Data contained within the core database include information collated from peer reviewed scientific manuscripts, expedition reports and other public data outside the scientific literature, management and policy documents, and private communications. These data contain information on breeding pairs of penguins only, and does not contain information on non-breeding distributions or sightings-at-sea. The fundamental unit of this database is the breeding “site”, which represents a population breeding on a single island or, in some cases, a discrete area of a larger landmass. In some cases, a geographically distributed population may be divided into multiple “sites” depending on the logistics of ground surveys, where each “site” can be accessed from a single landing location along the coastline. Rarely, several smaller nesting areas will be aggregated into a single “site” following historical precedent. Each site is associated with a unique four digit alphanumeric code, a name, and a specific geographic location. Note that several species may inhabit a single “site”. Data are ingested into the database manually and extensively checked against existing maps and records to ensure consistency. Because of the complexity of the geography and the different naming systems, site names may be changed between a published record and the database.
2. The database includes data on the number of nests (equivalently, breeding pairs), the number of chicks, or the number of total adults. If multiple measures are available (a count of nests and also a count of chicks), the database will include all data points as separate entries. Each data point is associated with information on the survey date, the survey method, an estimate of the accuracy of each data point, and a reference. In this database, we follow the five-point scale initially used by Croxall and Kirkwood (1979) and described in detail in Supplementary Materials 1 to Che-Castaldo et al. (2017). If the original data source followed the Croxall and Kirkwood scale or reported an uncertainty that could be translated into that scale, our database includes that precision value. Where no information on uncertainty is provided, we estimate the precision based on information provided in the original account.
3. Some data are not eligible to be included in this database. Data that are collected at a spatial scale other than the “site” cannot be included. All data must be “site-wide” census estimates. In keeping with our commitment to open-source data, data that are not in the public domain or remain in private collections unavailable to the public are also not included in this database. Data that cannot be verified and/or cannot be unambiguously assigned to a “site” are not included. Data on the presence of breeding pairs absent a population estimate are included only when no survey data exist.
4. While traditional methods of surveying penguin colonies rely on the direct enumeration of penguin nests by ground-based researchers, more recent surveys have relied on various remote sensing methods. Remotely-piloted aircraft systems (RPAS; also known as drones, quadcopters, or unmanned aerial vehicles) take photographs from a low-altitude flight over the colony and yield photographs sufficient for the individual enumeration of nests, chicks, or adults. While the precision of such counts depends on the timing of the survey and the quality of the imagery, RPAS are capable of providing exceptionally precise counts and are often in the high accuracy category of N1. Satellite imagery can identify the areal extent of breeding colonies through the spectral properties of penguin guano and these estimates can be used to estimate the number of breeding pairs at a “site”. Because the precision of such estimates remains an active research question, all such estimates are assigned the lowest accuracy category of N5 (broadly defined as “order-of-magnitude”).
5. In some cases, data from a single location in a given year is published in multiple venues. However, it is difficult to know whether these multiple outlets represent one actual sampling event because the same event may be associated with different occurrence or abundance records between sources, either because earlier mistakes were corrected or because data were re-analyzed. It also can happen that a single site is surveyed multiple times by separate parties on the same day, arriving at different counts due to observation error. Our approach is to classify an event as a survey conducted at a specific site and time, using a specific sampling protocol, and reported in a specific publication (peer-reviewed article, policy document, thesis, or other type of report), dataset, or personal communication. From each event, there can be one or more occurrence or measurement records, depending on the number of species or life stages reported. In cases where we have information that data from a unique sampling event is published in multiple venues, we retain all records reported in publications and datasets, and drop duplicate records if the duplicate event is based on personal communication. We allow this potential duplication because 1) it is not clear which source is ultimately correct if counts differ between sources and 2) withholding records creates confusion with our end-users as to whether we have overlooked sources of data.

Referencias bibliográficas

1. Che-Castaldo, C., S. Jenouvrier, C. Youngflesh, K.T. Shoemaker, G. Humphries, P. McDowall, L. Landrum, M.M. Holland, Y. Li, R. Ji, and H.J. Lynch, “Pan-Antarctic analysis aggregating spatial estimates of Adélie penguin abundance reveals robust dynamics despite stochastic noise,” Nature Communications 8:832 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00890-0
2. Croxall, J.P., and E. D. Kirkwood. The distribution of penguins on the Antarctic Peninsula and islands of the Scotia Sea. Cambridge: British Antarctic Survey, 1979.
3. Humphries, G., R. Naveen, M. Schwaller, C. Che-Castaldo, P. McDowall, M. Schrimpf, and H.J. Lynch, “Mapping Application for Penguin Populations and Projected Dynamics (MAPPPD): Data and tools for dynamic management and decision support,” Polar Record 53, 2 (2017): 160–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0032247417000055
4. The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. (2023). SCAR Report 42 - September 2022 - SCAR Data Policy (2022). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7825314

Metadatos adicionales