"Conservationists(自然保护主义者)maybe miscalculating the numbers of the threatened animals such
aselephants."say African and American researchers.The error occurs becauseof a flaw in the way that they
estimate animalnumbers from the piles of dung(粪)the creatures leave behind.
The mistake couldlead researchers to think that there are twice as many elephants as therereally are in
someregions,according to Andrew Plumptre of the Wildlife ConservationSociety(WCS)in
Biologist Katy Payneof
phant numbers andthe evidence that we have is quite indirect,"says Payne,who electronically
tracks elephants.
Counting elephantsfrom planes is impossible in the vast rainforests of
ten estimateelephant numbers by counting dung piles in a given area.They also need to knowthe rate at
which dungdecays.Because it's extremely difficult to determine these rates,researcherscounting elephants
in one region tendto rely on standard decay rates established elsewhere.
But researchers atthe WCS have found that this decay rate varies from region to region dependingon the
climate andenvironment. " Using the wrong values can lead the census astray(离开正道),"says Plumptre.
He and his colleagueAnthony Chifu Nchanji studied decaying elephant dung in the forests of Came-
roon.They found thatthe dung decayed between 55 and 65 per cent more slowly than the dung in the
rainforests ofneighbouring Gabon.If researchers use decay rates from
they would probablyfind more elephants than are actually around."This could mean estimates in
are at least twiceas high as those derived from decay rates calculated locally,"saysPlumptre."However
accurate your dungdensity estimate might be,the decay rate can severely affect the result."
Plumptre also saysthat the dung-pile census should be carried out over a region similar in sizeto an ele-
phant's naturalrange."The usual technique of monitoring only small,protected areasdistorts numbers be-
cause elephants movein and out of these regions,"he says."If the elephant populationincreases within the
protected area,youcannot determine whether it is a real increase or whether it is due toelephants moving in
because they arebeing poached(入侵偷猎)outside."
Plumptre says thatsimilar problems may also affect other animal census studies that rely onindirect evi--
dence such asnests,tracks or burrows(地洞).
A.Andrew Plumptre
B.Katy Payne
C.Anthony ChifuNchanji
D.the writer of thearticle
[单选题]Don ' t Count onDung"Conservationists(自然保护主义者)maybe miscalculating the numb
[单选题]Don ' t Count onDung"Conservationists(自然保护主义者)maybe miscalculating the numb
[单选题]Don ' t Count onDung"Conservationists(自然保护主义者)maybe miscalculating the numb
[单选题]Don ' t Count onDung"Conservationists(自然保护主义者)maybe miscalculating the numb
[单选题]Don't Count on Dung(粪便)Conservationists(自然保护主义者)may be miscalculating thenu
[单选题]Don't Count on Dung(粪便)Conservationists(自然保护主义者)may be miscalculating thenu
[单选题]Don't Count on Dung(粪便)Conservationists(自然保护主义者)may be miscalculating thenu
[单选题]Don't Count on Dung(粪便)Conservationists(自然保护主义者)may be miscalculating thenu
[单选题]Don't Count on Dung(粪便)Conservationists(自然保护主义者)may be miscalculating thenu
[单选题]Don't Be WorkaholicWorkaholic andworking hard are quite different.Working h