{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020594965675057208, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007627765064836003, 'mean_word_length': 5.869109947643979, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
LANDBIRD COUNTING TECHNIQUES: CURRENT PRACTICES AND AN ALTERNATIVE

Abstract Counting techniques are widely used to study and monitor terrestrial birds. To assess current applications of counting techniques, we reviewed landbird studies published 1989–1998 in nine major journals and one symposium. Commonly used techniques fell into two groups: procedures that used counts of bird detections as an index to abundance (index counts), and procedures that used empirical models of detectability to estimate density. Index counts rely upon assumptions concerning detectability that are difficult or impossible to meet in most field studies, but nonetheless remain the technique of choice among ornithologists; 95% of studies we reviewed relied upon point counts, strip transects, or other index procedures. Detectability-based density estimates were rarely used and deserve wider application in landbird studies. Distance sampling is a comprehensive extension of earlier detectability-based procedures (variable-width transects, variable circular plots) and a viable alternative to index counts. We provide a conceptual overview of distance sampling, specific recommendations for applying this technique to studies of landbirds, and an introduction to analysis of distance sampling data using the program DISTANCE.