What
does Program MONITOR do? This software estimates the
statistical power
of ecological monitoring programs. Because many design
variables interact to determine the capacity of a monitoring program to
detect change, intuitive answers are elusive for such basic questions
as: "How many plots should I monitor?" or "How often should I conduct
surveys?" or "For how long should I monitor?" Program MONITOR is
essentially a sample size estimator.
Program MONITOR uses simulation procedures to evaluate how each
component of a monitoring program influences its power to detect
change. The program has been cited in numerous peer-reviewed
publications since it first became available in 1995 (see
below for sample of peer-reviewed publications using Program
MONITOR). The specific components of sampling design that the
software integrates are:
- Number of plots monitored
- Frequency of plot re-measurement each season
- Occasions of plot surveys through time
- Magnitude of values of measurements on each plot
- Variation in measurements on each plot: all sources
of variation
pooled together, or within- ("sampling") and between-season ("process")
variation partitioned separately
- Magnitude of ongoing population change
- Significance level associated with change detection
- Number of tails considered in statistical tests of
trend significance
- Data type: Normally/log-normally distributed or
presence/absence
- Pattern of variation in the relationship of magnitude
of measurements
versus their variance over time (coefficient of variation constant
versus proportional to the mean measurement)
- Whole versus fractional measures (rounding)
- Measurement truncation
Program MONITOR uses regression, ANOVA or nonparametric tests of trend
as appropriate. Most users will apply Program
MONITOR to design population monitoring programs but the
software is applicable to any designing research programs for
which an index is measured over time and space. Program
MONITOR has an optimization routine that can be used to find the
least-cost sampling design once you have declared desired power levels
and maximum sampling effort you are willing to undertake. The
software is a useful tool for teaching students about change
detection and sampling design.
Program MONITOR does not at present integrate temporal or spatial
autocorrelation into the estimation procedure...we have algorithms to
do so but lack the time and resources to do the programming.
We would like to include these capacities into the program’s next
version if support can be found for doing so. |
(v. 11.0.0 MS Windows version, file name “monsetup.zip”; program will
self-install when you “unzip” it and click on “monsetup.exe”)
Download example input files (.zip file including swallowwort, bear and
bittern .mon files)
Download sample MS Excel spreadsheet for partitioning
sampling from process variation given pilot monitoring data (courtesy
of Dr.Brian Underwood)
About MONITOR version 11.0.0
March 16, 2010
Copyright 1995-2010 James P. Gibbs and Eduard Ene
This is a freeware application - do not distribute it in any commercial
form.
Please credit the authors in any published work that makes use of the
software, using the following citation:
Gibbs, J. P., and Eduard Ene. 2010. Program Monitor: Estimating the
statistical power of ecological monitoring programs. Version 11.0.0.
URL: www.esf.edu/efb/gibbs/monitor/
Background: The program was first developed in 1995 (as a DOS
application written in Turbo Pascal 7.0). This is its first major
renovation, prompted in large part by the need for a Windows-based
version and a critique of the program by Hatch (2003, Biological
Conservation 111:317-329). The current version of the software was
programmed in C++.
Acknowledgments: The software benefited greatly from the technical
comments of Sam Droege, Tim Gerrodette, Scott A. Hatch, and Clinton T.
Moore and the technical advice and encouragement and assistance of
Pablo Ramirez, Greg Hood, Scott Melvin, Greg Shriver, Brian Underwood,
Jim Hines, and Einar Mencle. Many users have also provided us with
valuable feedback.
Suggestions: Send them to jpgibbs@esf.edu Note that we are unable to
provide consultation on use of the software - it is provided for your
use on an "as is" basis.
Software created by James P. Gibbs and Eduard Ene, State University of
New York, College of Forestry and Environmental Science, Syracuse, NY
13210 USA
|
A sampling of publications citing Program MONITOR:
- Flesch
AD, Steidl RJ Population trends and implications for monitoring cactus
ferruginous pygmy owls in Northern Mexico JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE
MANAGEMENT 70 (3): 867-871 JUN 2006
- Lewis KP Statistical power, sample sizes, and the software to calculate them easily BIOSCIENCE 56 (7): 607-612 JUL 2006
- Pollock
JF Detecting population declines over large areas with
presence-absence, time-to-encounter, and count survey methods
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 20 (3): 882-892 JUN 2006
- Freilich JE, Camp
RJ, Duda JJ, et al. Problems with sampling desert tortoises: A
simulation analysis based on field data JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT
69 (1): 45-56 JAN 2005
- Woodsmith RD, Noel JR, Dilger ML An
approach to effectiveness monitoring of floodplain channel aquatic
habitat: channel condition assessment LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING 72
(1-3): 177-204 APR 30 2005
- Corser JD, Dodd CK Fluctuations in a
metapopulation of nesting four-toed salamanders, Hemidactylium
scutatum, in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA, 1999-2003
NATURAL AREAS JOURNAL 24 (2): 135-140 APR 2004
- Newmark WD,
Senzota RBM Power to detect trends in ecological indicators in the East
Usambara Mountains, Tanzania AFRICAN JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY 41 (4): 294-298
DEC 2003
- Salvidio S, Delaugerre M Population dynamics of the
European leaf-toed gecko (Euleptes europaea) in NW Italy: Implications
for conservation HERPETOLOGICAL JOURNAL 13 (2): 81-88 APR 2003
- Hebert
CE, Weseloh DVC Assessing temporal trends in contaminants from
long-term avian monitoring programs: The influence of sampling
frequency ECOTOXICOLOGY 12 (1-4): 141-151 FEB-AUG 2003
- Storfer A Amphibian declines: future directions DIVERSITY AND DISTRIBUTIONS 9 (2): 151-163 MAR 2003
- Hayward
GD, Miquelle DG, Smirnov EV, et al. Monitoring Amur tiger populations:
characteristics of track surveys in snow WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN 30
(4): 1150-1159 WIN 2002
- Lor S, Malecki RA Call-response surveys
to monitor marsh bird population trends WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN 30
(4): 1195-1201 WIN 2002
- Acosta CA, Perry SA Spatio-temporal
variation in crayfish production in disturbed marl prairie marshes of
the Florida Everglades JOURNAL OF FRESHWATER ECOLOGY 17 (4): 641-650
DEC 2002
- Galimberti F Power analysis of population trends: An
application to elephant seals of the Falklands MARINE MAMMAL SCIENCE 18
(2): 557-566 APR 2002
- Marsh DM Fluctuations in amphibian populations: a meta-analysis BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 101 (3): 327-335 OCT 2001
- Cooper BA, Raphael MG, Mack DE Radar-based monitoring of marbled murrelets CONDOR 103 (2): 219-229 MAY 2001
- Johnson CM, Krohn WB The importance of survey timing in monitoring breeding seabird numbers WATERBIRDS 24 (1): 22-33 2001
- Bishop
MA, Meyers PM, McNeley PF A method to estimate migrant shorebird
numbers on the Copper River Delta, Alaska JOURNAL OF FIELD ORNITHOLOGY
71 (4): 627-637 FAL 2000
- Smith CK, Petranka JW Monitoring
terrestrial salamanders: Repeatability and validity of area-constrained
cover object searches JOURNAL OF HERPETOLOGY 34 (4): 547-557 DEC 2000
- Corser
JD Decline of disjunct green salamander (Aneides aeneus) populations in
the southern Appalachians BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 97 (1): 119-126 JAN
2001
- Lewis SA, Gould WR Survey effort effects on power to
detect trends in raptor migration counts WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN 28
(2): 317-329 SUM 2000
- Warnock N, Haig SM, Oring LW Monitoring
species richness and abundance of shorebirds in the western Great Basin
CONDOR 100 (4): 589-600 NOV 1998
- Nelson SM, Epstein ME
Butterflies (Lepidoptera : Papilionoidea and Hesperioidea) of
Roxborough State Park, Colorado, USA: Baseline inventory, community
attributes, and monitoring plan ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 22 (2):
287-295 MAR-APR 1998
- Becker BH, Beissinger SR, Carter HR At-sea
density monitoring of marbled Murrelets in central California:
Methodological considerations CONDOR 99 (3): 743-755 AUG 1997
|