The effect of wildlife carcass underreporting on KDE+ hotspots identification and importance

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F44994575%3A_____%2F20%3AN0000018" target="_blank" >RIV/44994575:_____/20:N0000018 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479720311786?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479720311786?via%3Dihub</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111254" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111254</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

The effect of wildlife carcass underreporting on KDE+ hotspots identification and importance

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Many approaches have been developed in order to mitigate wildlife-vehicle collisions (WVC), their causes and consequences. Reliable data on the amount and location of killed animals along roads are therefore necessary. The existing WVC databases are usually, however, far from complete. This data underreporting causes problems when identifying the riskiest places along a transportation infrastructure. WVC data underreporting can distort the results of WVC hotspots determination. In this work, we simulated WVC hotspots identification and stability under various rates of WVC data underreporting. Our aim was to investigate whether WVC hotspots can be found at the original locations even when data are strongly underreported. We applied the KDE + method for WVC hotspots identification. The KDE + method also allows for hotspots ranking according to cluster strength and collective risk. These two measures were then used for detection of diminishing hotspot signals with a rising level of underreporting. We found that WVC hotspots with a greater cluster strength suffered less from underreporting whereas hotspots will lower values of both cluster strength and collective risk were not detected when underreporting in the data increased. Hotspots with a cluster strength above 0.5 were almost always detected when data underreporting remained below 50%. More than 50% of these hotspots (with cluster strength above 0.5) were detectable even when underreporting rate was between 50 and 80%. We further studied the effects of both spatial and temporal underreporting. Whereas temporal change of underreporting was not a problem in hotspots detection, spatial underreporting introduced significant errors producing both false positive and false negative results (hotspots). We conclude that both researchers and practitioners should be aware of the phenomenon of underreporting and should also try to maintain the same sampling effort of spatial reporting.

Název v anglickém jazyce

The effect of wildlife carcass underreporting on KDE+ hotspots identification and importance

Popis výsledku anglicky

Many approaches have been developed in order to mitigate wildlife-vehicle collisions (WVC), their causes and consequences. Reliable data on the amount and location of killed animals along roads are therefore necessary. The existing WVC databases are usually, however, far from complete. This data underreporting causes problems when identifying the riskiest places along a transportation infrastructure. WVC data underreporting can distort the results of WVC hotspots determination. In this work, we simulated WVC hotspots identification and stability under various rates of WVC data underreporting. Our aim was to investigate whether WVC hotspots can be found at the original locations even when data are strongly underreported. We applied the KDE + method for WVC hotspots identification. The KDE + method also allows for hotspots ranking according to cluster strength and collective risk. These two measures were then used for detection of diminishing hotspot signals with a rising level of underreporting. We found that WVC hotspots with a greater cluster strength suffered less from underreporting whereas hotspots will lower values of both cluster strength and collective risk were not detected when underreporting in the data increased. Hotspots with a cluster strength above 0.5 were almost always detected when data underreporting remained below 50%. More than 50% of these hotspots (with cluster strength above 0.5) were detectable even when underreporting rate was between 50 and 80%. We further studied the effects of both spatial and temporal underreporting. Whereas temporal change of underreporting was not a problem in hotspots detection, spatial underreporting introduced significant errors producing both false positive and false negative results (hotspots). We conclude that both researchers and practitioners should be aware of the phenomenon of underreporting and should also try to maintain the same sampling effort of spatial reporting.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10619 - Biodiversity conservation

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/ED2.1.00%2F03.0064" target="_blank" >ED2.1.00/03.0064: Dopravní VaV centrum</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)<br>I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2020

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Environmental Management

ISSN

0301-4797

e-ISSN

1095-8630

Svazek periodika

275

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

11

Strana od-do

1-11

Kód UT WoS článku

000582474500040

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85089700346