Is there still a point to point counts?

Clicks: 21
ID: 332094
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #28 of 38 articles by views in Ornithological Applications

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Point counts are commonly used to quantify bird distributions and have been a standard method in ornithological research for over a century. We argue that although recent advancements in avian sampling have called into question whether they continue to be an efficient and cost-effective method for gathering data, point counts still play a critical role in ornithology and will for the foreseeable future. We review the history of point counts and their contributions to our understanding of ecology. We then compare point counts to passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) and citizen science (e.g., eBird) in terms of spatial and temporal sampling scales, costs and logistics, survey methods, ancillary data collection, species identification and documentation, data management, and population analyses. Depending on the research question, PAM and citizen-science datasets can offer cost-effective and scalable alternatives to sampling bird communities, but neither is completely interchangeable with point counts. The advantages of PAM include noninvasive sampling at fine temporal resolutions, archivable data, and efficient pathways to spatiotemporal scaling. Citizen-science data can be collected at broad spatial extents, and some of the financial costs are absorbed by project volunteers. At present, however, neither approach can replace the point count when it comes to recording nuanced behavioral observations, estimating distances, or counting individuals. Indeed, the strength of all these approaches may be in the way they complement one another, and the field may benefit most from continued research that integrates these methods to improve estimates of avian populations and distributions.
Reference Key
openalex_W7221452845 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Jonathon J. Valente, Lucas Parvin, Kylie Blake, Matthew J. Weldy, Matthew G. Betts
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Ornithological Applications
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ornithapp/duag092
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ornithapp/duag092
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.