Line transect distance sampling (LTDS) can be applied to either trails or roads. However, it is likely that sampling along roads might result in biased density estimates. In this paper, we compared the results obtained with LTDS applied on trails and roads for two primate species (Callithrix penicillata and Callicebus nigrifrons) to clarify whether roads are appropriate transects to estimate densities. We performed standard LTDS surveys in two nature reserves in south-eastern Brazil. Effective strip width and population density were different between trails and roads for C. penicillata, but not for C. nigrifrons. The results suggest that roads are not appropriate for use as transects in primate surveys, at least for some species. Further work is required to fully understand this issue, but in the meantime we recommend that researchers avoid using roads as transects or treat roads and trails as covariates when sampling on roads is unavoidable.

Keywords:
Primate density estimates, Parque Estadual Serra do Rola Moça, Callithrix penicillata, Callicebus nigrifrons, Line transect survey, Estação Ecológica de Fechos
1.
Anderson DR, Laake JL, Crain BR, Burnham KP (1979). Guidelines for line transect sampling of biological populations. Journal of Wildlife Management 43: 70–78.
2.
Brugiere D, Fleury MC (2000). Estimating primate densities using home range and line transect methods: a comparative test with black colobus monkey Colobus satanas. Primates 41: 373–382.
3.
Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Laake JL (1993). Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. London, Chapman & Hall.
4.
Buckland ST, Plumptre AJ, Thomas L, Rexstad EA (2010). Design and analysis of line transect surveys for primates. International Journal of Primatology 31: 833–847.
5.
Burnham KP, Anderson DR, Laake JL (1980). Density estimates from line transects sampling of biological populations. Wildlife Monographs 72: 1–202.
6.
Chagas RRD, Ferrari SF (2010). Habitat use by Callicebus coimbrai (Primates: Pitheciidae) and sympatric species in the fragmented landscape of the Atlantic forest of southern Sergipe, Brazil. Zoologia 27: 853–860.
7.
Chiarello AG, Melo FR (2001). Primate population densities and sizes in Atlantic forest remnants of northern Espírito Santo, Brazil. International Journal of Primatology 22: 379–396.
8.
Costa MD (2009). Desenvolvimento de um novo método (audiotelemetria) para estudos em ecologia de sauás Callicebus nigrifrons (Primates: Pithecidae) em fragmento de Mata Atlântica em Pouso Alegre, MG. Master’s dissertation, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
9.
Cottam G, Curtis JT (1956). The use of distance measures in phytosociological sampling. Ecology 37: 451–460.
10.
Cullen L Jr, Valladares-Pádua C (1996). Métodos para estudos de ecologia, manejo e conservação de primatas na natureza. In Manejo e conservação de vida silvestre no Brasil (Valladares-Padua C, Bodmer RE, Cullen L Jr, eds.), pp 239–269. Brasília/Belém, CNPq/Sociedade Civil de Mamirauá.
11.
Develey PF, Stouffer PC (2001). Effects of roads on movements by understory birds in mixed-species flocks in central Amazonian Brazil. Conservation Biology 15: 1416–1422.
12.
Digby LJ, Ferrari SF, Saltzman W (2007). Callitrichines: the role of competition in cooperatively breeding species. In Primates in Perspective (MacKinnon KC, Panger M, Bearder S, Campbell C, Fuentes A, eds.), pp 85–106. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
13.
Eberhardt LL (1978). Transect methods for population studies. Journal of Wildlife Management 42: 1–31.
14.
Fashing PJ, Cords M (2000). Diurnal primate densities and biomass in the Kakamega Forest: an evaluation of census methods and a comparison with other forests. American Journal of Primatology 50: 139–152.
15.
Ferrari SF (1988). The Behaviour and Ecology of the Buffy-Headed Marmoset, Callithrix flaviceps (O. Thomas, 1903). PhD thesis, University College London.
16.
Ferrari SF (2002). Multiple transects or multiple walks? A response to Magnusson (2001). Neotropical Primates 10: 131–132.
17.
Ferrari SF, Chagas RRD, Souza-Alves JP (2010). Line transect surveying of arboreal monkeys: problems of group size and spread in a highly fragmented landscape. American Journal of Primatology 72: 1100–1107.
18.
Forman RTT, Alexander LE (1998). Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29: 207–231.
19.
Fuentes-Montemayor E, Cuarón AD, Vázquez-Domínguez E, Benítez-Malvido J, Valenzuela-Galván D, Andresen E (2009). Living on the edge: roads and edge effects on small mammal populations. Journal of Animal Ecology 78: 857–865.
20.
González-Solís J, Guix JC, Mateos E, Llorens L (2001). Population density of primates in a large fragment of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest. Biodiversity and Conservation 10: 1267–1282.
21.
Hassel-Finnegan HM, Borries C, Larney E, Umponjan M, Koenig A (2008). How reliable are density estimates for diurnal primates? International Journal of Primatology 29: 1175–1187.
22.
Heiduck S (2002). The use of disturbed and undisturbed forest by masked titi monkeys Callicebus personatus melanochir is proportional to food availability. Oryx 36: 133–139.
23.
Hershkovitz P (1990). Titis, New World monkeys of the genus Callicebus (Cebidae: Platyrrhini): a preliminary taxonomic review. Fieldiana 55: 1–109.
24.
Kierulff MCM, Rylands AB (2003). Census and distribution of the golden lion tamarin (Leontopithecus rosalia). American Journal of Primatology 59: 29–44.
25.
Laurance WF, Croes BM, Guissouegou N, Buij R, Dethier M, Alonso A (2008). Impacts of roads, hunting, and habitat alteration on nocturnal mammals in African rainforests. Conservation Biology 22: 721–732.
26.
Laurance WF, Croes BM, Tchignoumba L, Lahm SA, Alonso A, Lee ME, Campbell P, Ondzeano C (2006). Impacts of roads and hunting on central African rainforest mammals. Conservation Biology 20: 1251–1261.
27.
Magnusson WE (2001). Standard errors of survey estimates: what do they mean? Neotropical Primates 9: 53–54.
28.
Marshall AR, Lovett JC, White PCL (2008). Selection of line-transect methods for estimation of the density of group-living animals: lessons from the primates. American Journal of Primatology 70: 1–11.
29.
Martins WP (2005). Distribuição geográfica e conservação do macaco-prego-de-crista, Cebus robustus (Primates: Cebidae). Master’s dissertation, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
30.
McGregor RL, Bender DJ, Fahrig L (2008). Do small mammals avoid roads because of the traffic? Journal of Applied Ecology 45: 117–123.
31.
Mitani JC, Struhsaker TT, Lwanga JS (2000). Primate community dynamics on old growth forest over 23.5 years at Ngogo, Kibale National Park, Uganda: implications for conservation and census methods. International Journal of Primatology 21: 269–286.
32.
Morais MM Jr (2005). Metodologias de amostragem de populações: aplicação e comparação em populações de Mico-Leão-Dourado ( Leontopithecus rosalia, Linnaeus, 1766) e sagüis ( Callithrix sp. Erxleben, 1777) na bacia do Rio São João. Master’s dissertation, Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense.
33.
NRC (1981). Techniques for the Study of Primate Population Ecology. Washington, National Academy Press.
34.
Paccagnella SG (1991). Censo da população de monos (Brachyteles arachnoides) do Parque Estadual Carlos Botelho, Estado de São Paulo. In A Primatologia no Brasil – 3 (Rylands AB, Bernardes AT, eds.), pp 225–233. Brasília, SBPr.
35.
Peres CA (1999). General guidelines for standardizing line-transect surveys of tropical forest primates. Neotropical Primates 7: 11–16.
36.
Plumptre AJ (2000). Monitoring mammal populations with line transect techniques in African forests. Journal of Applied Ecology 37: 356–368.
37.
Plumptre AJ, Cox D (2006). Counting primates for conservation: primate surveys in Uganda. Primates 47: 65–73.
38.
Rosenberger AL (1992). Evolution of feeding niches in New World monkeys. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 88: 525–562.
39.
Rylands AB (1996). Habitat and the evolution of social and reproductive behavior in Callitrichidae. American Journal of Primatology 38: 5–18.
40.
Souza-Alves JP, Fontes IP, Chagas RRD, Ferrari SF (2011). Seasonal versatility in the feeding ecology of a group of titis (Callicebus coimbrai) in the northeastern Brazilian Atlantic forest. American Journal of Primatology 73: 1–11.
41.
Strier KB, Boubli JP, Possamai CB, Mendes SL (2006). Population demography of northern muriquis (Brachyteles hypoxanthus) at the Estação Biológica de Caratinga/Reserva Particular do Patrimônio Natural-Feliciano Miguel Abdala, Minas Gerais, Brazil. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 130: 227–237.
42.
Thomas L, Buckland ST, Rexstad EA, Laake JL, Strindberg S, Hedley SL, Bishop JRB, Marques TA, Burnham KP (2010). Distance software: design and analysis of distance sampling surveys for estimating population size. Journal of Applied Ecology 47: 5–14.
43.
Trevelin LC, Port-Carvalho M, Silveira M, Morell E (2007). Abundance, habitat use and diet of Callicebus nigrifrons Spix (Primates, Pitheciidae) in Cantareira State Park, São Paulo, Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 24: 1071–1077.
44.
Trombulak SC, Frissel CA (2000). Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology 14: 18–30.
45.
Wegge P, Storaas T (2009). Sampling tiger ungulate prey by the distance method: lessons learned in Bardia National Park, Nepal. Animal Conservation 12: 78–84.
46.
Whitesides G, Oates JF, Green SM, Kluberdanz RP (1988). Estimating primate densities from transects in a West African rain forest: a comparison of techniques. Journal of Animal Ecology 57: 345–367.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.