Poor correlation between diamondback terrapin population estimates using two new estimation methods

Abstract

Reliable estimates of animal and plant population sizes are necessary to track trends in populations through time. Diamondback terrapins are an ecologically unique keystone species that are globally declining. Conservation efforts for this species rely on accurate estimates of population sizes; however, diamondback terrapin population size estimates are difficult to measure with precision or accuracy. Terrapin collection methods are often labor-, time-, and cost-intensive. The present study compares two recently developed rapid assessment methods for measuring diamondback terrapin abundances. Since mark–recapture or similar data were unavailable, we could not test the accuracy of either method directly; instead, we compared the two methods. If the methods produce similar estimates of terrapin population size, this would increase confidence in these methods. We measured the abundance of diamondback terrapins at 77 sites in Long Island, New York, using headcount surveys and surveys of parasitic trematodes that can be used as a proxy for terrapin abundance. We used random forest analyses to test whether the variation in diamondback terrapin abundance measured using headcount surveys could be explained by either the prevalence or the abundance of trematode parasites. The most variation explained by any of the models was 7.77%, indicating that trematode prevalence and abundance could not explain the variation in terrapin abundance measured using headcounts. This poor correlation between terrapin census methods indicates that one, or both, of the census measures are inaccurate, at least in the habitats found across Long Island, NY. A technique that accurately estimates the abundance of diamondback terrapin populations is critical to understanding their population fluctuations and trends. The only way to evaluate the status of the species is to have information on population numbers and trends across the species’ range, which might not be possible without a more accessible survey method.