LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Your last searches

  1. AU="R. Bischof"
  2. AU="Eileen McNeely"
  3. AU="Canales-Manchuria, Fabrizzio"
  4. AU="Schäfer, Martin"
  5. AU=Lodhia Nilesh
  6. AU="Philippe Lefebvre"
  7. AU="McClorey, Graham"
  8. AU="Henein, Sandra"
  9. AU=Ng Michael
  10. AU="Elgammal, S"
  11. AU="Vaghela, Dixa A"
  12. AU="Lebigot, E O"
  13. AU="Abnave, Prasad"
  14. AU="Honkanen, Robert"
  15. AU="Talior-Volodarsky, Ilana"
  16. AU="Ellison, J"
  17. AU=Yang Ruinan
  18. AU=Lund Harald
  19. AU="Puskar, Werner"
  20. AU=Klotz S.
  21. AU="Andrea Puebla-Huerta"
  22. AU="Hartley, Tim"
  23. AU="Beucher, G"
  24. AU="Phan, Phuc Huu"
  25. AU="Arwanto, Viviana"
  26. AU="Miguel E. Rentería"
  27. AU="Zhou Bingfeng, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou(China), College of Bee Science"
  28. AU="Anant Desai, (UK)"
  29. AU="Mauget-Faÿsse, Martine"
  30. AU="Pang, Yuyang"
  31. AU="Akinwunmi, Adenike O"
  32. AU="Gopalakrishnan, Shyam"
  33. AU="Muralidharan, K K"
  34. AU="Andersson, Borje S"
  35. AU="Bajaj, Sumali"
  36. AU="Iwanaga, Terunao"
  37. AU="Alanazi, Bader S"
  38. AU="Tsuda, Kazutoshi"
  39. AU=Gilroy Derek W
  40. AU="Yang, Shaofan"
  41. AU="Cucui, Andrea"
  42. AU="Sarma, Birinchi Kumar"
  43. AU="Schrader, Thomas"
  44. AU="Macleod, Kay F"
  45. AU="Vishnuprabha, R. Sangeetha"
  46. AU=Singh B N
  47. AU="Shahir Asfahan"
  48. AU="A.E.Pace, "
  49. AU="Scharbert, J"
  50. AU=Alganabi Mashriq
  51. AU=Balthazar Emil J
  52. AU="Pallos, Debora"
  53. AU="Tatsuya Igarashi"
  54. AU="Martinez, Randy"
  55. AU="Fu, Yayan"
  56. AU=Hertel Laura
  57. AU="Sasivimolrattana, Thanayod"
  58. AU="McAuley, Arnold" AU="McAuley, Arnold"
  59. AU="Reithmeier, Reinhart A F"
  60. AU="Ma, Dongmei"
  61. AU="Suh, M. H"
  62. AU="Xiao-Cheng Sun"
  63. AU="Belizario Quispe, Germán"

Search results

Result 1 - 2 of total 2

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: Integrating dead recoveries in open‐population spatial capture–recapture models

    P. Dupont / C. Milleret / M. Tourani / H. Brøseth / R. Bischof

    Ecosphere, Vol 12, Iss 7, Pp n/a-n/a (2021)

    2021  

    Abstract: Abstract Integrating dead recoveries into capture–recapture models can improve inference on demographic parameters. But dead‐recovery data do not only inform on individual fates; they also contain information about individual locations. Open‐population ... ...

    Abstract Abstract Integrating dead recoveries into capture–recapture models can improve inference on demographic parameters. But dead‐recovery data do not only inform on individual fates; they also contain information about individual locations. Open‐population spatial capture–recapture (OPSCR) has the potential to fully exploit such data. Here, we present an open‐population spatial capture–recapture–recovery model integrating the spatial information associated with dead recoveries. Using simulations, we investigate the conditions under which this extension of the OPSCR model improves inference and illustrate the approach with the analysis of a wolverine (Gulo gulo) dataset from Norway. Simulation results showed that the integration of dead recoveries into OPSCR boosted the precision of all demographic parameters. In addition, the integration of dead‐recovery locations boosted the precision of the inter‐annual movement parameter, which is difficult to estimate in OPSCR, by up to 40% in case of sparse data. We also detected a 139–367% increase in the probability of models reaching convergence with increasing proportion of dead recoveries when dead‐recovery information was integrated spatially, compared with a 30–107% increase when integrating dead recoveries in a non‐spatial way. The analysis of the wolverine data showed the same general pattern of improved parameter precision. Overall, our results highlight how leveraging the demographic and spatial information contained in dead‐recovery data in a spatial capture–recapture framework can improve population parameter estimation.
    Keywords capture–recapture–recovery ; integrated modeling ; known fate ; mortality ; population dynamics ; spatial capture–recapture ; Ecology ; QH540-549.5
    Subject code 310
    Language English
    Publishing date 2021-07-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher Wiley
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  2. Article: Effects of method of harvest of Triticum aestivum L. on straw biomass and estimated accumulation of soil carbon

    Weiser, C / R. Bischof / H. Heß

    European journal of soil science. 2017 Nov., v. 68, no. 6

    2017  

    Abstract: Climate change and increased extraction of agricultural residues for bioenergy can adversely affect soil fertility. A more accurate understanding of biomass that remains in or on arable soil is necessary to improve results of carbon (C) balances of ... ...

    Abstract Climate change and increased extraction of agricultural residues for bioenergy can adversely affect soil fertility. A more accurate understanding of biomass that remains in or on arable soil is necessary to improve results of carbon (C) balances of cropped land. Mechanical and manual harvesting of winter wheat grain and material other than grain (MOG) were carried out at three field stations in Thuringia, Germany, in 2012 and 2013. We compared various methods of harvesting MOG, which resulted in different straw/grain ratios (SGR) and their effect on C balancing. For all experiments, the total biomass yield and SGR were larger for manual than mechanical harvesting. Substantial differences in SGR resulted for the various methods of mechanical MOG recovery. Surprisingly, methods of harvesting without biomass deposition to the soil surface cannot be regarded as more accurate in general than those with intermediate MOG deposition. Using these SGRs to determine the amount of MOG available for the maintenance of soil organic carbon (SOC) resulted in an underestimate of the actual biomass by up to 47%. For stubble heights of 5–15 cm, a mean of 8–22% of MOG remained in the field as stubble. Thus, the method of MOG assessment should be considered for SGR values used to calculate the C input as a model parameter. We demonstrated that SOC is underestimated by up to 24% when the simplified C turnover model CANDY Carbon Balance (CCB) is not parameterized correctly. HIGHLIGHTS: How do specific straw/grain ratios (SGR) of wheat change modelled carbon accumulation? Removal of straw from arable soil for energy provision will gain more attention. Default SGR of the selected carbon model underestimates biomass input to soil by ∼47%. Consequently carbon accumulation is underestimated by up to 24%.
    Keywords Triticum aestivum ; agricultural wastes ; arable soils ; bioenergy ; biomass production ; candy ; climate change ; energy ; manual harvesting ; mechanical harvesting ; models ; soil fertility ; soil organic carbon ; straw ; stubble ; winter wheat ; Germany
    Language English
    Dates of publication 2017-11
    Size p. 971-978.
    Publishing place Blackwell Publishing Ltd
    Document type Article
    Note JOURNAL ARTICLE
    ZDB-ID 1191614-x
    ISSN 1365-2389 ; 1351-0754
    ISSN (online) 1365-2389
    ISSN 1351-0754
    DOI 10.1111/ejss.12470
    Database NAL-Catalogue (AGRICOLA)

    More links

    Kategorien

To top