A forwarded reply from a slug specialist to this request follows; unfortunately 
Mark Wilson didn't leave a contact e-mail address in his post, otherwise I 
would send it directly rather than to the whole listserv.

Thanks,

Markus Eichhorn


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Wilson
> Sent: 14 January 2011 17:08
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Monitoring
>
> Hi folks,
> I ve collected count data (once monthly) from eight trees (one trap
> per tree) for a species of protected slug in the UK over the past
> year. A fellow student here mentioned in passing that I could
> potentially use power statistics on my data to calculate the amount of
> time it would take to detect a red alert (50% or greater decrease in
> population size over 25 years) or amber alert (25% decrease over 25
> years). Would this be possible and can anybody advise me on what
> statistics program I could use for my analysis?
> Looking forward to hearing from you
> Mark
> PS I did not remove specimens from the traps on my monthly visits. I
> just counted and left them in place.


Dear Mark,

I saw your appeal for help and I hope that some of the things I say may 
be of use. There are not many of us slug watchers in the UK and even fewer 
people 
who record, or have recorded, slug abundance. I am one of those few. I 
am an amateur with no formal qualification in mollusc matters; indeed no 
formal, academic qualification in anything related to natural history. I 
am just someone who has spent much of his spare time over the last 40 
years observing and recording things in the natural world. You can email 
me at [email protected] if you think I can be of any help to 
you.

I do have some observations which may be relevant but you may not be 
happy with what they appear to imply.

I did some standardised slug counting experiments over a period of 2 
years.  There was an annual cycle of abundance which was fairly 
consistent between the two years. However, the absolute abundance was 
rather different between these years. I did no statistics on the data 
but, if I had, I am pretty sure there would have been a significant 
difference between years. It was not because of climate change, or 
because some species were increasing or decreasing in the long term. I 
think it was simply that the weather was different. This is the first 
problem with detecting long-term changes. Slug populations can be 
volatile and a significant difference between two successive years, 
however great, cannot be used to indicate a long-term decline. For that, 
you need a long time series. How long? We have found some of our data in 
a bird monitoring operation, that have been able to detect long-term 
changes with data sets as short as 10 years long - but you do need 
annual data, not just two snapshots 10 years apart.

There is another problem with slugs. Abundance of slugs counted does not 
necessarily go with abundance of slugs. When times are hard (too hot, 
too dry, too cold, too windy) the cunning beasts go underground or under 
shelter and are not easily countable. What you count depends on both 
what is there and the immediate weather conditions. And this recorded 
abundance can change massively from one day to the next (and I have 
example data sets to demonstrate this). A systematic data collection 
system which did not take into account wind, rain, temperature would be 
misleading.

I am not sure what species you study but we do have a tree-living 
species here, Lehmannia marginata. It spends a good deal of time up 
trees grazing on algae. However, like species which remain close to 
ground level, L. marginata is very dependent on weather. In dry 
conditions it is more likely to be inactive or operating at ground 
level. In frosty conditions it does not operate at all. If I had slug 
traps in trees, the number trapped would reflect both abundance and weather.

Overall then, there are big problems with slug abundance data and its 
analysis. But do not let that deter you - it is well worth the challenge.

-- 
Mr C R du Feu

66 High Street,
Beckingham,
Nottinghamshire,
DN10 4PF

Telephone 01427 848 400

[email protected]


This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may 
contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, 
please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy 
or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.  
Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily 
reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.

Reply via email to